LIBRARY 

OF  THE 

University  of  California. 

RECEIVED    BY    EXCHANGE 

Class 

rif^ 


J 

Sta.JL 

14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 
on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 

/ 

RETURN       CIRCULATION  DEPARTMENT 
TObh^       202  Main  Library 

LOAN  PERIOD  1 
HOME  USE 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 

1 -month  loans  may  be  renewed  by  calling  642-3405 

6-month  loans  may  be  recharged  by  bringing  books  to  Circulation  Desk 

Renewals  and  recharges  may  be  mode  4  days  prior  to  due  date 

DUE   AS  STAMPED  BELOW 

ja;iBBfc    ^.^    ^7r 

•  ■  '••;,     1             -,    '-         ''•• 

SFC'D  CIRC  nFPT     p 

•B25            1 

JUL  Ob  1989 

ocT24iy8y 

FORM  NO.  DD  6, 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  BERKELEY 
BERKELEY,  CA  94720 


EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND 
TOWNS 


A  COMPARATIVE  STUDY  OF  THEIR  DEVELOPMENT 


BY 

ANNE  BUSH  MACLEAR,  A.  M. 


SUBMIITED    IN    PARTIAL    FULFILMENT    OF    THE    REQUIREMENTS 

FOR    THE    DEGREE    OF    DOCTOR    OF    PHILOSOPHY 

IN  THE 

Faculty  of  Political  Science 
Columbia  University 


1908 


EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND 
TOWNS 

A  COMPARATIVE  STUDY  OF  THEIR  DEVELOPMENT 


BY 

ANNE  BUSH  MACLEAR,  A.  M. 


SUBMITTED    IN    PARTIAL    FULFILMENT    OF    THE    REQUIREMENTS 

FOR    THE    DEGREE   OF    DOCTOR    OF    PHILOSOPHY 

IN   THE 

Faculty  of  Political  Science 
Columbia  University 


1908 


^^^^^ 


Copyright,  1908 

BY 

ANNE  BUSH  MACLEAR 


^ 

i^ 


£>eliicateli   to 
MY  FATHER  AND  MOTHER 

WHOSE  CONSTANT  ENCOURAGEMENT  ENABLED  ME 
TO  COMPLETE  MY  WORK 


188866 


PREFACE 

The  purpose  of  this  work  is  to  give  in  some  detail  an 
account  of  the  institutional  life  of  a  Massachusetts  town 
of  the  seventeenth  century  by  means  of  a  comparison  of  the 
institutions  of  five  of  the  earliest  of  these  towns, — Salem, 
Dorchester,  Watertown,  Roxbury  and  Cambridge. 

To  accomplish  this,  it  was  found  necessary  to  omit  many  of 
the  more  picturesque  features  connected  with  the  settlement 
and  early  years  of  these  towns  and  to  confine  this  investiga- 
tion to  the  institutions  and  to  their  development  during  the 
century.  This  was  the  more  easily  done  since  the  former 
phase  of  town  history  has  been  so  well  treated  already  that  it 
seems  impossible  to  improve  upon  the  accounts  we  now  have. 

No  attempt  is  made  here  to  reproduce  exactly  the  spell- 
ing, form  of  expression  or  punctuation  of  the  records 
quoted.  In  many  cases  these  are  almost  unintelligible,  and 
in  all  instances  they  are  so  difficult  to  decipher  that  it  does 
not  seem  wise  to  demand  from  the  reader  the  effort  neces- 
sary to  read  them. 

I  wish  to  thank  Dr.  Herbert  L.  Osgood,  of  Columbia 
University  for  his  many  kindnesses  to  me  during  the  years 
I  studied  with  him,  and,  also,  for  his  valuable  suggestions 
in  regard  to  this  work. 

Anne  Bush  MacLear. 

New  York,  March,  1908. 

7]  7 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER  I 

PAGE 
THE  TOWN   AS  A   WHOLE 

Definition  of  an  early  New  England  town 13 

Settlement  of  Salem,  Dorchester,  Watertown,  Roxbury  and  Cam- 
bridge    16 

Control  of  General  Court  over  the  towns 2a 

Additional  land  grants  made  to  the  towns 26 

Formation  of  new  towns  from  the  original  ones 28 

The  settlement  of  these  towns  typical  group  settlements 33 

Representation  of  the  towns  in  the  General  Court 38 

Extinguishing  of  Indian  titles  40 

CHAPTER  n 

TOWN   COURTS 

Control  of  the  General  Court  over  the  local  courts 44 

The  formation  of  inferior  courts 45 

The  law  of  the  colony 46 

The  meeting  of  the  selectmen  a  police  court 47 

The  commissioner  of  small  causes 49 

The  clerk  of  the  writs 51 

The  jury 51 

The  method  of  adjusting  difficulties  between  inhabitants  of  different 

towns   53 

CHAPTER  HI 

TOWN   FINANCES 

Method  of  raising  money  needed  by  the  town 55 

The  town  rate 57 

Increased  power  of  selectmen  over  town  finances 58 

Definition  of  '  *  town  rate  "  60 

Method  of  determining  value  of  taxable  property 61 

9]  9 


10  CONTENTS  [lO 

PAGE 

Exemption  from  paying  rate 62 

Method  of  taking  invoices 63 

Taxation  of  trades  and  other  occupations 66 

Method  of  collecting  rates 68 

The  constables  and  their  duties 69 

Payment  in  kind 72 

The  colony  rate 74 

The  county  rate 78 

CHAPTER  IV 

TOWN   LANDS 

Method  of  assigning  land   81 

The  home  lots 81 

Division  of  arable  and  meadow  lands 82 

Illustrations  from  Salem,   Watertown,  Dorchester,   Roxbury  and 

Cambridge 83 

Common  fields 87 

Stinted  pasturage 92 

Town  commons 93 

Conditions  attached  to  grants  made  from  the  land  common  to  all 

the  town 94 

Commonage  of  wood 95 

Common  herds 96 

Highways  98 

Classes  of  inhabitants  based  upon  ownership  of  land loi 

CHAPTER  V 

TOWN   GOVERNMENT 

The  town  meeting 106 

Different  classes  of  town  meetings    >  114 

The  selectmen  116 

Supervision  of  the  selectmen  by  the^own 117 

Payment  of  the  selectmen  125 

Constables 126 

Minor  town  officials 129 

Methods  of  publishing  town  orders 131 

Admission  of  new  inhabitants 132 

Town  regulations 135 

Care  of  the  town  for  welfare  of  its  inhabitants 136 


Il]  CONTENTS  II 

FAGS 

CHAPTER  VI 

THE  CHURCH 

Importance  of  church 137 

Agreements  made  by  the  company  with  ministers 138 

Method  of  organizing  a  church 139 

The  pastor  and  the  teacher 142 

Control  exercised  over  the  churches 143 

Method  of  choosing  a  minister 145 

The  meeting-house 153 

Assignment  of  pews 156 

Importance  of  minister 157 

ReHgious  instruction 158 

CHAPTER  VII 

THE   SCHOOLS 

Importance  of  schools 161 

Meaning  of  "free"  schools 162 

Payment  of  the  teacher 162 

Methods  of  supporting  schools   164 

Management  of  school  matters 168 

Curriculum  of  the  schools 174 

Instructions  to  the  schoolmaster  of  Dorchester 174 

Length  of  the  school  session   177 

The  school-house 178 

Salary  of  the  schoolmaster 171 

Town  supervision  of  education i 


m 


CHAPTER  I 
The  Town  in  General 

The  New  England  town  of  the  seventeenth  century  was 
a  village  community  settled  for  purposes  of  good  neighbor- 
hood and  defense.  Its  most  characteristic  features  resulted 
from  the  topography  of  the  country,  and  from  the  ideas  of 
the  nature  of  a  town  which  the  colonists  brought  from  Eng- 
land. Forced  by  the  geographical  features  of  New  England 
and  by  the  necessity  of  protection,  the  colonists,  already  ac- 
quainted, settled  in  groups,  and  at  once  began  organizing 
their  settlements  in  accordance  with  the  type  familiar  to 
them — ^the  old  English  manor.  Between  this  and  the  New 
England  town  many  analogies  may  be  drawn,  showing  the 
Germanic  origin,  not  only  of  the  government  with  its 
democratic  features,  but  of  the  form  of  settlement — a  com- 
pact town  with  outlying  fields — and  of  the  land  system,  with 
"  the  houses  and  home  lots  fenced  in  and  owned  in  severalty,/ 
with  common  fields  outside  the  town,  and  with  a  surround-' 
ing  track  of  absolutely  common  and  undivided  land  used 
for  pasturage  and  woodland  under  communal  regulations." 

The  initiative  in  founding  a  town  was  usually  taken  by  the 
General  Court.  It  fixed  the  boundaries  of  the  town  and 
gave  the  land  within  these  bounds  "to  men  of  good  repute" 
upon  condition  that  within  two  years  "  they  should  erect 
houses  for  habitation  thereon  and  go  on  to  make  a  town 
there."  ^    In  1635,  the  court  decreed  that  "the  maior  part"  of 

*  Edward  Johnson,  Wonder  Working  Providence,  p.  176. 

13]  13 


J 


14  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [14 

the  magistrates  should  have  power  from  time  to  time  to 
dispose  of  the  "  sitting  down  of  men  "  in  any  new  planta- 
tion and  that  none  should  go  without  leave  from  them ;  ^ 
and,  that  same  year,  it  was  ordered  in  accordance  with  this 
law,  that  there  should  be  a  "  Plantation  set  about  two  miles 
above  the  falls  of  Charles  River,  on  the  north  east  side  there- 
of, to  have  ground  lying  to  it  on  both  sides  the  river,  both 
upland  &  meadow  to  be  laid  out  hereafter  as  the  court 
should  appoint."  ^  Another  example  of  this  method  of 
founding  a  town  is  given  in  the  records  of  the  court  for 
1688.  Then  several  petitioners  were  granted  liberty  "  to 
begin  a  plantation  at  Winnacunnet,"  several  men  being  ap- 
pointed "  to  assist  in  setting  out  the  place  of  the  town  " 
and  in  proportioning  the  '*  several  quantity  "  of  land  to  each 
man/  The  men  to  whom  the  land  had  been  granted  by  the 
General  Court  had,  in  their  turn,  power  "  to  give  and  grant 
out  lands  to  any  persons  who  were  willing  to  take  up  town 
dwellings  within  these  precincts  and  to  be  admitted  to  all 
the  common  privileges  of  the  town  "  the  said  town  giving 
them  "  such  a  supply  of  meadow  and  upland  as  they  shall 
need  for  their  present  and  future  stock  of  cattle."  * 

The  majority  of  the  early  towns  of  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury passed  through  two  stages  of  development, — that  of 
a  plantation  begun  by  the-  express  permission  of  the  court, 
and  that  of  a  self-governing  town.  While  in  the  planta- 
tion stage,  the  towns  were  more  or  less  under  the  super- 
vision of  the  General  Court  which  directed  the  laying-out  of 
their  lots,  and,  in  extreme  cases  when  the  requirements  of 
the  grant  were  not  being  fulfilled,  took  the  direct  control 
of  the  plantation  into  its  own  hands.     In  1638,  for  example, 

^Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  167.  ^  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  156. 

3  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  236. 

*  Wonder  Working  Providence,  p.  176. 


15]  THE  TOWN  IN  GENERAL  I^ 

permission  was  given  by  the  General  Court  to  several  peti- 
tioners to  settle  a  plantation  at  Winnacunnet;  ^  in  1642,  to 
settle  one  at  Nantasket;  ^  and  in  1645,  "upon  the  petition  of 
the  undertakers  for  the  plantation  at  Nashaway,"  the  court 
agreed  that  any  three  out  of  five  men  v^ho  were  mentioned 
in  the  order  by  name  should  have  "  power  to  set  out  lots  to 
all  ye  planters  provided  that  they  set  not  their  houses  too  far 
asunder  .  .  .  and  that  no  man  shall  have  his  land  confirmed 
to  him  before  he  hath  taken  the  oath  of  fidelity  before  some 
magistrate."  ^  As  the  grantees  in  this  case  did  nothing 
about  laying  out  the  plantation,  the  court  took  the  matter 
into  its  own  hands  deciding  that  it  would  look  after  "  ye 
placing  and  ordring  of  it "  until  other  men  who  would  do 
it  could  be  found.*  At  another  time  permission  was  given 
by  the  General  Court  to  twelve  men  to  start  a  plantation  of 
ten  miles  square  forty  or  fifty  miles  west  of  Springfield,  if 
they  would  do  it  in  eighteen  months.^ 

The  change  from  a  plantation  to  a  self-governing  town  / 
was  made  by  authority  of  the  Court,  a  change  of  name  usu- 
ally accompanying  the  change  of  status.  In  1639,  the  plan- 
tation Winnacunnet  was  allowed  to  become  a  town  with 
"  power  to  chose  a  constable  &  other  officers  &  to  make 
orders  for  the  well  ordering  of  their  town,  &  to  send  a 
deputy  to  the  Court."  Three  men  were  appointed  to  act  as 
commissioners  of  small  causes  for  that  year  and  the  laying- 
out  of  land  was  left  to  those  "  expressed  in  the  former 
order."  ^  In  1653,  the  Nashaway  plantation  was  allowed 
to  change  its  name  to  West  Town,  and  the  court  ordered 
"  that  the  new  plantation  by  Concord  shalbe  called  Sud- 

1  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  259.  ^  Ibid.,  vol.  2,  p.  5. 

3  Ibid.,  vol.  2,  p.  212.  ■*  Ibid.,  vol.  3,  p.  302. 

» Ibid.,  vol.  4,  pt.  I,  p.  374. 
«  Ibid.,  vol.  I,  p.  259;  vol.  3,  p.  302. 


l6  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [i6 

berry;  Winnacunnet  shalbee  called  Hampton;  the  other 
plantation  beyond  Merimack  Shalbee  called  Colchester — " 
afterward  Salsbery/ 

Though  the  statements  in  the  paragraph  above  are  true 
of  the  majority  of  the  Massachusetts  towns  in  the  seven- 
teenth century,  they  do  not  apply  to  the  original  towns 
within  the  jurisdiction  of  that  colony,  among  which  were 
Dorchester,  Cambridge,  Salem,  Roxbury,  and  Watertown 
— the  towns  which  form  the  basis  of  this  study.  These 
were  founded  without  any  supervision  from  the  General 
Court,  and  were  never  plantations  in  the  sense  that  the 
latter  towns  were,  though  one  of  them,  Salem,  passed 
through  a  plantation  stage. 

Indeed,  the  settlement  of  these  five  towns — Dorchester, 
Watertown,  Cambridge,  Salem,  and  Roxbury — was  totally 
unlike  that  of  the  typical  Massachusetts  town.^ 

The  settlement  of  Salem  was  entirely  unique,  for  no  other 
town  in  the  colony  passed  through  so  many  phases  as  did 
this  the  first  town  within  the  Massachusetts  borders.  Be- 
ginning as  a  fishing  station  on  Cape  Ann,  and,  upon  the 
failure  of  those  interested  in  its  success,  removing  to  its 
present  location,  it  became  a  plantation  of  the  newly  or- 
ganized Massachusetts  Bay  Company.  For  the  two 
succeeding  years — 1628-30  —  Salem  was  a  plantation  of 
the  early  proprietary  type — like  Virginia  under  the  London 
Company — the  joint  proprietors  of  which  were  the  patentees 
of  the  Massachusetts  Bay  Company.  During  these  years, 
Cradock,  the  president  of  the  company,  speaks  of  it  again 
and  again  as  "  our  Plantation."    On  April  17,  1629,  for  in- 

*  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  271 ;  vol.  i,  p.  305. 

2  For  the  history  of  the  settlement  of  these  towns,  see  Essex  Institute 
Collections;  vol.  34  of  Reports  of  Boston  Record  Commissioners;  Paige, 
History  of  Cambridge;  Felt,  Annals  of  Salem;  Memorial  History  of 
Boston;  Henry  Bond,  History  of  Watertown. 


17]  THE  TOWN  IN  GENERAL  ly 

Stance,  he  says  that  "  we  have  ordered  the  government  there 
to  consist  of  thirteen  persons  among  whom  we  are  con- 
tent that  the  old  planters  within  our  Plantation  shall  chose 
two;"  ^  at  another  time,  he  speaks  of  his  aim  in  ''  settling 
the  plantation ;"  and,  in  sending  Endicott  to  America  in  1629, 
the  company  informed  him  that  he  was  elected  "  Governor 
in  our  plantation."  ^  The  next  phase  in  the  development  of 
Salem  was  introduced  by  the  removal  of  the  Massachusetts 
Bay  Company  to  America.  The  arrival  of  Winthrop,  Dud- 
ley, the  assistants,  and  the  majority  of  the  company  changed 
the  settlement  from  a  plantation  owned  and  governed  by 
people  at  a  distance  into  a  corporate  colony,  while  the  sub- 
sequent dispersion  of  the  members  of  the  company  and  the 
formation  of  other  settlements  made  Salem  only  one  of  the 
many  towns  within  the  bounds  of  the  colony. 

While  Watertown,  Roxbury,  Dorchester,  and  Cambridge 
do  not  show  in  their  manner  of  settlement  the  unique  fea- 
tures of  Salem  they,  too,  differ  in  their  origin  from  the 
typical  Massachusetts  town.  Watertown,  Roxbury,  and 
Dorchester  were  among  the  first  towns  settled  by  those 
members  of  the  company  who  came  over  with  Winthrop. 
They  were  founded  simultaneously,  under  the  pressure  of 
necessity,  and  without  any  guidance  from  the  general  court. 
It  had  been  intended  that  Salem  should  be  the  main  settle- 
ment of  the  colony,  but  land  there  was  already  becoming 
scarce,  so  that  those  who  came  with  Winthrop  thought  it 
best  to  seek  new  places  for  their  settlements.  There  was 
no  time  to  wait  for  permission  from  the  company  or  to  ask 
for  grants  of  land.  Wherever  a  location  offered  those 
things  for  which  the  settlers  were  looking, — wood,  water, 
pasturage,    protection    from    enemies,  —  there    the    group 

1  Young's  Chronicles  of  Massachusetts,  p.  144. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  142,  and  Hazard  Collections,  vol.  i,  p.  239. 


l8  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [ig 

settled  and  began  laying  out  the  town.  Dudley,  writing 
to  the  Countess  of  Lincoln,  March  12,  1631,  says,  "  We  be- 
gan to  consult  of  the  place  of  our  sitting  down ;  for  Salem, 
where  we  landed  pleased  us  not.  And  to  that  purpose  some 
were  sent  to  the  Bay,  to  search  up  the  rivers  for  a  con- 
venient place  ...  we  found  a  place  [that]  liked  us  better, 
three  leagues  up  Charles  river;  and  thereupon  unshipped  our 
goods  into  other  vessels  and  with  much  cost  and  labor 
brought  them  in  July  to  Charlestown,  but  there  receiving 
advertisement  by  some  of  the  late  arrived  ships  from  Lon- 
don and  Amsterdam,  of  some  French  preparations  against 
us  many  of  our  people  brought  with  us  being  sick  of  fevers 
and  the  scurvy,  and  we  thereby  unable  to  carry  up  our  ord- 
nance and  baggage  so  far  we  were  forced  to  change  coun- 
sel, and  for  our  present  shelter  to  plant  dispursedly.  This 
dispersion  troubled  some  of  us  but  help  it  we  could  not, 
wanting  ability  to  move  to  any  place  fit  to  build  a  town 
upon,  and  the  time  too  short  to  deliberate  any  longer  lest 
the  winter  should  suprise  us  before  we  had  builded  our 
houses."  * 

The  first  settlers  at  Dorchester  came  from  Dorchester, 
England,  many  of  them  being  members  of  Mr.  White's 
church.  They  left  Plymouth  in  a  special  vessel,  ''  The 
Mary  and  John,"  and  reached  Nantasket  May  30,  1630,  be- 
fore the  Arbella,  which  was  bringing  Winthrop  and  his 
company,  arrived.  The  captain  refusing  to  take  them 
farther,  they  were  forced  to  land  at  Nantasket,  where  they 
would  have  fared  badly  had  they  not  secured  a  boat  of 
some  old  planters  there  into  which  they  loaded  their  goods 
and,  well  armed,  went  in  her  to  Charlestown,  where  they 
found  some  grain  and  one  house.^     After  an  exploring  trip 

1  Young's  Chronicles,  p.  312  et  seq. 

^  Young's  Chronicles,  Clap's  Memoirs,  p.  349. 


ig]  THE  TOWN  IN  GENERAL  ig 

up  Charles  river  the  majority  of  the  group  decided  to  settle 
upon  a  place  called  Mattapan  because  there  was  a  "  neck 
of  land  fit  to  put  our  cattle  on."  ^  There  were  then  a  few-- 
other  Englishmen  in  Massachusetts,  ''  at  Plymouth  and 
Salem,  and  some  at  Charlestown."  ^  Watertown  was 
founded  by  men  from  Essex  County,  England,  who  came 
over  with  Winthrop's  company  and  landed  at  Salem. 
For  various  reasons  the  situation  of  Salem  did  not  suit 
them,  and  they  accompanied  Winthrop  to  Charlestown 
which,  however,  pleased  them  no  better.  They  complained 
that  the  water  was  too  brackish  and  the  site  too  near  the 
coast.  Consequently,  they  considered  it  wiser  to  seek  a 
more  favorable  location  and  some  of  the  company  led,  by 
Mr.  Phillips  and  Sir  Richard  Saltonstall,  wandered  "  west- 
ward on  the  Charles  River  four  miles  from  Charlestown 
which  place  they  named  Watertown."  ^  Roxbury  owes  its 
founding  to  this  same  dispersion  of  the  colonists  who  came 
with  Winthrop.  At  the  time  when  Mr.  Phillips  and  his  fol- 
lowers wandered  to  Watertown,  another  group  led  by 
"  Mr.  Pincheon  and  several  others  planted  betwixt  Boston 
and  Dorchester;  which  place  was  called  Roxbury."  *  Cam*^ 
bridge  in  its  origin  is  as  unique  as  Salem,  for  it  alone  of  all 
Massachusetts  towns  was  founded  by  the  governor,  deputy 
governor,  and  assistants  for  a  specific  purpose, — namely,  to 
be  the  capital  of  the  colony  and  its  chief  seat  of  defence. 
On  December  6,  1630,  Winthrop,  Dudley,  and  the  assistants 
met  at  Roxbury  to  choose  a  site  for  a  fortified  town  to 
take  the  place  of  the  fort  they  had  at  first  planned  to  build.'' 
They  agreed  "  to  build  a  town  fortified  upon  the  neck  be- 

1  Clap's  Memoirs,  p.  350.  =  Ibid.,  p.  35i- 

3  Young's  Chronicles,  pp.  313-314- 

*  Ibid.,  p.  381.  °  Ibid.,  p.  320  et  seq. 


20  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [20 

tween  that  town,  —  Roxbury,  —  and  Boston."^  Further 
discussion,  however,  seemed  to  show  that  this  was  imprac- 
ticable and  they  finally  decided,  on  December  28,  that,  the 
*'  town  for  the  seat  of  Government  should  be  on  the  north- 
west of  the  Charles  River."  ^  To  insure  the  success  of  this 
scheme,  the  governor,  the  deputy  governor  and  all  the  assis- 
tants except  Endicott  and  Sharpe  agreed  to  build  in  the  new 
town  before  the  spring  of  1631.  Although  this  plan  was 
not  fully  carried  out  it  led  to  the  founding  of  Cambridge, 
and  gave  that  town  a  certain  importance  in  the  colony. 

Although  these  towns  were  founded  without  any  authori- 
zation from  the  government  of  the  colony,  they  were  not 
permitted  to  enjoy  their  independence  for  any  length  of 
time.  Almost  immediately  after  their  settlement,  the 
General  Court  began  that  supervision  over  them  which  it 
continued  to  exercise  throughout  the  century.  The  first  in- 
stance of  this  control  was  the  action  of  the  colonial  authori- 
ties in  naming  two  of  them — Dorchester  and  Watertown. 
This  occurred  in  September,  1630,  when  the  Court  of  As- 
sistants ordered  that  "  Mattapan  shall  be  called  Dorchester, 
and  the  town  upon  the  Charles  River  Watertown."  ^  To  the 
central  authority  Cambridge  also  owes  its  name — or,  at  least, 
the  confirmation  of  the  name  chosen  for  it  by  its  prominent 
citizens — for  in  1636  the  court  ordered  that  "  New  Town 
should  be  called  Cambridge."  Salem  and  Roxbury  did 
not  experience  this  control,  Salem*  receiving  its  name  in 
1629,  from  the  settlers  after  the  arrival  of  Higginson,  and 

1  Prince,  Annals,  vol.  2,  pp.  563-564- 

2  Ihid. 

8  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  75- 

*  Felt,  Annals  of  Salem,  vol.  i,  p.  6.  In  this  passage  is  given  a  com- 
plete discussion  of  the  reason  for  changing  the  name  to  Salem,  the 
meaning  of  the  name,  and  the  date  when  it  was  adopted. 


21  ]  THE  TOWN  IN  GENERAL  2 1 

Roxbury  being  named  from  the  character  of  the  land  upon 
which  the  town  was  settled. 

In  many  other  ways  during  1630  did  the  Court  of  As- 
sistants cause  these  towns  to  realize  that  they  were  not  inde- 
pendent of  its  authority.  On  September  28,  it  ordered 
"  that  there  shall  be  collected  and  levied  by  distress  out  of 
the  seuall  plantacons,  for  the  maintenance  of  Mr.  Patricke 
and  Mr.  Underbill  the  sum  of  5o£  viz. :  out  of  Charlestown, 
7£;  Boston,  ii£;  Dorchester,  yi\  Roxbury,  5£;  Waterton, 
ii£;  Meadford,  3£;  Salem,  3£;"  etc.  And  on  March 
22,  1 63 1  the  Assistants  again  ordered  every  town  within 
the  bounds  of  the  colony  to  pursue  a  course  of  action  of 
which  it  approved,  namely  "  to  take  pains  to  provide  every 
person  in  the  town  except  magistrates  and  ministers  "  with 
"  good  and  sufficient  arms;"  and  in  May,  1631  they  ordered 
every  town  to  provide  "  comon  measures  and  weights."  ^ 
In  1633  Boston  and  Roxbury  were  ordered  to  make  a  "  cart 
bridge  over  Muddy  River  and  another  over  Stony  River." 

Instances  like  those  given  above  could  be  multiplied  in- 
definitely, but  these  are  sufficient  to  prove  that  the  colonial 
authorities  from  the  very  beginning  considered  that  the 
towns  which  were  so  independent  in  origin  stood  in  the  same 
relation  to  them  as  the  towns  for  whose  inception  they  were 
responsible.  A  few  examples  will  show  how  this  relation 
continued  during  the  century.  In  1639,  the  General  Court 
decreed  that  it  or  any  two  magistrates  could  determine  any 
questions  about  the  support  of  poor  persons  and  could 
**  dispose  of  all  onsettled  p'sons  into  such  towns  as  they 
shall  iudge  to  bee  most  fitt  for  the  maintainance  of  such 
p'sons  and  families."  ^  No  town  was  allowed  to  treat  the 
orders  of  the  General  Court  with  disrespect.      The  well- 

1  Mass.  Coll.  Rec,  vol.  i,  pp.  76,  89,  87,  107. 
^Ibid.,  vol.  I,  pp.  107,  264. 


22  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [22 

known  controversy  with  Salem  over  the  letters  which  she 
wrote  to  the  other  towns  to  gain  their  support  in 
the  affair  of  Roger  WiUiams  shows  most  clearly  the  re- 
spect which  the  magistrates  and  deputies  of  the  General 
Court  demanded.  Not  until  the  majority  of  the  freemen 
of  Salem  disowned  the  letters,  "  Wherein  they  have  exceed- 
ingly reproached  &  vilifyed  the  magistrates  &  deputies  of 
the  general  court  "  were  the  deputies  from  that  town  al- 
lowed to  become  members  of  the  General  Court/ 

Though  these  towns  were  settled  without  any  dehnite 
limits  being  assigned  them  by  the  General  Court  and  al- 
though for  some  years,  while  settlements  in  the  colony  were 
few  and  scattered,  they  were  allowed  to  spread  over  the 
territory  adjoining  their  original  sites  without  any  interfer- 
ence from  that  body,  yet,  as  soon  as  the  towns  grew  in  popu- 
lation and  size  so  that  the  bounds  of  one  town  approached 
those  of  another,  the  court  stepped  in,  and  decided  which 
share  of  the  land  in  dispute  belonged  to  each  town.  The 
first  instance  of  this  was  seen  in  the  case  of  Charlestown  and 
•  Cambridge  in  March,  1632.  It  was  then  agreed  "  by  the 
parties  who  were  appointed  by  the  court,"  for  the  "  setting 
out  the  bounds  of  Charlestown  &  Newe  Town,  .  .  .  First 
that  all  the  land  impaled  by  Newe  Towne  men  with  the  neck 
there  unto  adjoining,  whereupon  Mr.  Graves  dwelleth  sh^ll 
belong  to  the  said  Newe  Town,  &  that  the  bounds  of 
Charles  Towne  shall  end  at  a  tree  marked  by  the  said  pale 
and  to  pass  along  from  that  tree  by  a  straight  line  midway 
between  the  wester  most  part  of  the  great  lot  of  land  of 
John  Winthrop  Esq.  ...  &  the  nearest  part  there  to  of  the 
bounds  of  Waterton."  This  line  not  proving  satisfactory 
to  the  town,  the  assistants,  on  November  7,  1632,  referred 
the  matter  to  other  men  "to  view  the  ground,  wood,  & 

» Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  pp.  156-157-158.        ^ 


23]  THE  TOWN  IN  GENERAL  33 

meadow,  &  so  to  set  down  the  bounds  betwixt  them."  This 
committee,  however,  defined  the  bounds  of  the  towns  in 
practically  the  same  way  as  the  former  one  had  done. 

Watertown's  line  toward  Cambridge  was  not  settled  un- 
til 1635,  by  which  time  it  was  found  necessary  to  settle 
the  boundaries  of  the  towns  in  order  to  keep  peace  between 
them.  Therefore  the  court  ordered  that  the  line  between 
those  towns  should  run  "  from  Charles  River  to  Great  Fresh 
Pond  and  from  the  tree  marked  by  Watertown  and  New 
Towne  on  the  southeast  side  of  the  pond  over  the  pond  to 
a  white  poplar  tree  on  the  northwest  side  of  the  pond  and 
from  that  tree  up  into  the  country  northwest  and  by  west 
upon  a  straight  line  and  further,  that  Watertown  should 
have  100  rods  in  length  above  the  weire  and  100  rods  be- 
neath the  weire  in  length  &  three  score  rods  in  breadth  from 
the  river  on  the  south  side  thereof  and  all  the  rest  of  the 
ground  on  that  side  of  the  river  to  lie  to  Newe  Town."  * 
In  1636  and  1638,  the  western  boundary  of  Watertown  was 
defined.  This  was  found  necessary,  owing  to  the  settlement 
of  Concord  and  Dedham.^  The  boundary  was  defined  as 
follows:  first,  in  1636,  that  "the  bounds  of  Watertown 
shall  run  8  miles  into  the  country  from  the  meeting  house 
within  the  limits  already  assigned  her;"  ^  and,  in  1638, 
that  these  bounds  be  "  extended  upon  the  line  between  them 
and  Cambridge  as  far  as  Concord  bounds  give  leave,  and 
that  their  bounds  by  the  river  shall  run  8  miles  into  the 
country."  *  The  original  eastern  bounds  of  the  town  are 
supposed  to  correspond  very  nearly  with  the  present  Vassal 
Lane  and  Sparks  St.,  Cambridge,  beginning  at  the  southeast 

1  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i.  p.  144. 

2  Drake,  History  of  Middlesex  County,  p.  435. 

3  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  167.  » 
*  Ibid.,  vol.  I,  p.  230. 


24  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [24 

side  of  East  Bay  of  Fresh  Pond  and  running  to  the  most 
northerly  point  in  the  bend  of  the  river/ 

In  1638  a  committee  was  appointed  by  the  court  to  lay 
out  the  bounds  between  Watertown  and  Concord,  Water- 
town  and  Dedham,  Watertown  and  New  Town,  and  to 
give  Watertown  its  eight  miles  or  to  "  allow  them  satisfac- 
tion for  what  they  cannot  get,"  with  which  adjustment  they 
promised  to  remain  satisfied.  This  committee  settled  the 
question  by  giving  Watertown  its  eight  miles. 

In  1636  the  General  Court  fixed  the  bounds  of  Dor- 
chester, "  to  run  from  the  outside  of  Mr.  Rossiters  farm, 
next  the  sea  to  the  foot  of  ye  great  hill,  from  a  marked  tree 
to  a  second  marked  tree,  in  a  straight  line  to  the  top  of  the 
Blue  Hills,  nexte  Naponsett  southwest  and  by  west,  half 
a  point  westerly,  &  all  the  marsh  ground  from  the  south- 
east side  of  Mr.  Newberrys  house  along  Naponsett  River, 
to  Mr.  Stoughtons  mill,  to  lie  to  Dorchester  &  all  the  rest 
of  the  vpland  &  marsh  from  Mr.  Rossiters  farm  to  the 
sea,  &  so  to  the  mouth  of  the  river  beyond  Minotiquid 
River,  runing  into  the  country  southward  &  to  the  west, 
to  lie  to  Boston  onely  excepting  such  land  as  they  have  right 
to  by  graunt  of  the  court  formerly."  ^  In  1638  the  court 
defined  the  boundary  between  Dorchester  and  Dedham  as 
far  as  Plymouth.'* 

The  boundary  between  Roxbury  and  Boston  was  deter- 
mined before  1632-3,  for  the  court,  meeting  at  Boston  March 
14,  1632,  agreed  "  that  the  bounds  formly  set  out  betwixte 
Boston  &  Rocksbury  shall  continue,  only  Rocksbury  to  en- 
joy the  conveniency  of  the  creek  near  their  vnto."  *  Con- 
troversy arose  over  this  line  and,  to  settle  the  dispute,  the 

1  Drake,  op.  cit.,  p.  435. 

*  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  pp.  162-163. 

3  Ibid.,  vol.  I,  p.  231.  ■*  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  103. 


25]  THE  TOWN  IN  GENERAL  25 

court  in  1633  appointed  four  men  "to  set  out  the  bounds 
betwixte  Boston  &  Rocksbury,  which  is  now  in  difference 
betwixte  them."  ^  This  line  was  finally  decided  upon  in 
1636.  At  that  time  Roxbury  was  given  "  all  the  rest  of 
the  ground  between  Dorchester  bounds  and  Roxbury  bounds 
.  .  .  easterly  of  Charles  River  .  .  .  except  the  property  of 
the  aforesaid  towns  which  they  have  purchased  of  particular 
persons."  ^  Roxbury,  moreover,  was  not  to  extend  above 
eight  miles  in  length  from  its  meeting  house.  Roxbury  and 
Dedham  quarreled  continually  over  their  boundary.  Fin- 
ally a  committee  was  appointed  to  settle  this  dispute.  x\c- 
cording  to  its  recommendation,  which  was  confirmed  by  the 
General  Court  in  1638,  the  boundary  line  ran  ''  from  the 
south  side  of  Roxbury  bounds  by  a  straight  northwest  line 
running  till  it  touch  upon  Charles  River."  ^  However, 
changes  in  this  line  were  made  from  time  to  time  and  it  was 
not  definitely  located  until  1697.*  The  line  between  Rox- 
bury and  Cambridge  was  laid  out  in  1635,  "  to  run  south- 
west from  Muddy  River,  near  the  place  which  is  called  Mr. 
Novell's  bridge  ...  &  from  the  mouth  of  the  ryver  to  that 
place,  the  south  side  is  for  Rocxsbury  and  the  north  syde 
for  New  Town."  '^ 

-r  In  March,  1636,  after  the  arrival  at  Cambridge  of  Mr. 
Shepard  and  his  congregation,  the  General  Court  ordered 
that  the  limits  of  that  town  should  extend  "  eight  miles 
into  the  country  from  the  meeting  house,"  ^  and,  in  the 
following  year,  April  13,  1636,  defined  its  bounds  as  fol- 
lows :  "  from  the  marked  tree  by  Charles  River  on  the 

^Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  113.  ^  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  176. 

3  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  23. 

*  Report  of  the  Boston  Record  Commissioners,  vol.  34.  p.  48. 

5  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  144. 

« Ibid.,  vol.  I,  p.  166. 


26  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [26 

North  west  side  Roxbury  bounds,  one  mile  and  a  half  north- 
east, &  from  thence  three  miles  northwest  &  so  from  thence 
five  miles  southwest,  &  on  the  south  west  syde  Charles 
River  from  the  south  east  side  of  Roxberry  bounds,  to  run 
four  miles  on  a  south  west  line,  reserving  the  properties 
to  the  several  persons  granted  by  special  order  of  court."  ^ 

The  boundaries  of  the  towns  were  usually  fixed  by  men 
appointed  for  that  purpose  by  the  General  Court.  In  1634 
that  body  appointed  three  men  '*  to  settle  the  difference  be- 
tween Boston  and  Dorchester,  &  Boston  &  Charleston  over 
bounds,  and  also  the  difficulties  between  Cambridge  and 
Watertown."  Two  men,  usually  one  for  each  town — 
though  occasionally  two  from  each  town  were  chosen, — 
were  allowed  to  accompany  the  committee  *'  to  show  what 
ground  each  town  requires,"  but  no  one  else  could  go  with 
these  commissioners.^ 

To  the  grants  of  land  which  the  towns  first  received,  ad- 
ditions were  made  from  time  to  time  until  they  all  included 
a  much  greater  area  than  they  do  at  present.  Dorchester 
included  the  present  towns  of  Milton,  Dedham,  Dorchester 
Heights,  Washington  Village,  Hyde  Park,  Canton,  Stough- 
ton,  Sharon,  Foxboro,  and  part  of  Wrentham, — a  strip  of 
territory  thirty-five  miles  in  length  running  to  within  one 
hundred  and  sixty  rods  of  the  Rhode  Island  line.  Salem  in- 
cluded the  present  Wentham,  Beverly,  Middleton,  Man- 
chester, Marblehead,  Topsfield,  and  Danvers.  '..Cambridge 
included  Lexington,  Newton,  Arlington,  Brighton,  Bed- 
ford, Billerica,  and  probably  Tewksbury  and  portions  of 
Belmont  and  Winchester.^,  Watertown,  at  the  time  of  its 
greatest  size,  included  Waltham,  Weston,  the  greater  part  of 
Lincoln,  a  part  of  Belmont,  and  that  part  of  Cambridge 
east  of  Mt.  Auburn  Cemetery  between  Fresh   Pond  and 

^Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  I73-  ^  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  139-141. 


27]  7//£  TOIVN  IN  GENERAL  27 

Charles  River.  ^  Roxbury  included  the  present  Jamaica 
Plain  and  West  Roxbury  then  known  as  "  Jamaica  end 
and  Spring  Street  "  and,  later,  as  part  of  the  second  parish,^ 
These  additions  to  the  original  grants  were  made  by  the 
General  Court  usually  in  response  to  a  complaint  from  a 
town  that  it  was  suffering  from  lack  of  room.  In  1683 
Roxbury  petitioned  the  general  court  for  more  land,  '*  know- 
ing the  inconvenience  that  arises  from  lack  of  room  and 
that  it  has  already  caused  removal  not  only  from  the  town 
but  from  the  colony."  -^In  1640-41,  to  prevent  removal  from 
the  town  through  its  lack  of  new  land,  Cambridge  was  given 
the  "  land  lying  upon  the  Shawshin  Ryver  and  between  it 
and  the  Concord  River  and  between  it  and  the  Merrimac 
River."  ^^Salem  petitioned  for  more  land  in  1663,  because 
the  town  "  had  given  away  so  much  soil  it  had  not  enough  / 
to  support  the  population."  *:?^These  additional  grants  of  *^ 
land  given  by  the  court  to  the  town  were  usually  made  only 
under  certain  conditions,  the  non-fulfilment  of  which  ren- 
dered the  grant  void,  '^he  Shawshin  grant  given  to  Cam- 
bridge, was  conditional  upon  its  being  made  into  a  village 
containing  ten  families  within  three  yearsf '"^  the  grant  of 
land  "  about  Quatesset  in  the  Nipnuck  country  "  to  Roxbury 
in  1683  depended  upon  settling  ''  thirty  families  there  within 
three  years  "  who  should  be  able  to  support  a  minister;  ®  the 
grant  of  JPennicook,  a  tract  on  Merrimac  River  which  was 
given  Salem  in  1663,  required  that  no  less  than  twenty 
families  be  settled  there  in  three  years. ^    Dorchester  was 

^  Drake,  History  of  Middlesex  County,  p.  435. 

2  Report  of  the  Boston  Record  Commissioners,  vol.  34,  p.  437. 

3  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  306. 

*  Felt,  Annals  of  Salem,  vol.  i,  p.  22. 

5  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  330. 

^  Extract  from  the  Roxbury  Records  by  Mr.  W.  Thornton,  p.  4. 

^  Felt,  Annals  of  Salem,  vol.  i,  p.  221. 


28  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [28 

given  permission  in  1642  to  improve  "  a  supposed  mine  in 
Neitneet,"  if  they  went  effectually  on  with  it  within  one  year ; 
&  if  they  shall  thinke  fit  to  plant  a  convenient  number  of 
families  there  which  may  make  a  village  they  shall  have 
enough  land  if  they  go  effectually  about  it  within  three 
years ;"  \  Cambridge  was  granted  Billerica,  provided  "  that 
Bilericay  be  seated  with  twenty  families  at  least  within 
three  years."  ^  '^ 

"^  If  the  conditions  attached  to  the  grant  were  not  fulfilled, 
the  General  Court  either  took  back  the  land  or  extended  the 
time  allowed  the  town  to  meet  the  requirements.  "Roxbury  in 
1684  petitioned  for  an  allowance  of  more  time  in  settling  the 
Nipnuck  country  and  was  granted  an  additional  three  years, 
as  well  as  exemption  from  county  rates  during  that  time.* 
"^  It  is  a  characteristic  feature  of  the  settlement  of  Massa- 
chusetts, that  new  towns  were  formed  from  the  territory 
of  the  older  ones  and  were  peopled  by  those  who  had  form- 
erly been  inhabitants  of  the  mother  town.  This  division 
of  the  town  was  sometimes  brought  about  amicably,  but 
more  often  gave  rise  to  great  discussion  and  much  bitter- 
ness of  feeling,  the  mother  town  insisting  as  strongly  upon 
keeping  those  wishing  to  form  a  new  town,  as  they  did  upon 
being  allowed  the  right  to  leave.  The  controversy  was  usu- 
ally carried  to  the  General  Court  for  settlement.  That  body 
then  chose  committees  from  both  parties  to  argue  the  case 
before  it  and  settled  the  case  on  its  meritsX  A  controversy 
was  carried  on  for  years  between  Salem  and  Danvers  rela- 
tive to  the  separation  of  the  latter  from  the  former.  Salem 
steadily  refused  to  allow  Danvers  to  become  a  separate  town, 
and,  though  it  made  many  attempts  to  secure  permission  to 
do  so,  it  did  not  succeed  until  1757.     On  the  other  hand 

1  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  2,  p.  11.  ^  Ibid.,  vol.  3,  p.  405. 

*  Mass.  Arch.,  vol.  112,  p.  381. 


29]  THE  TOWN  IN  GENERAL  29 

Marblehead  was  released  by  Salem  very  easily.  In  this  case, 
indeed,  the  initiative  toward  separation  seems  to  have  come 
from  the  parent  town,  for  there  is  no  record  of  any  petition 
from  Marblehead  asking  for  release.  In  1648  the  town 
meeting  of  Salem  voted,  without  any  discussion  or  dis- 
agreement, "  that  Marble  Head  with  the  allowance  of  the 
general  Court  shalbe  a  Towne  and  the  bounds  to  the  ut- 
most extent  of  that  land  which  was  Mr.  Humphries  dispos- 
ing of  the  ferry  and  the  appointing  of  the  ferry  man  to 
Salem."  ^  And  on  May  2d,  in  the  following  year,  the 
General  Court  agreed  "  Upon  the  petition  of  the  inhabitants 
of  Marble  Head  for  them  to  be  a  Towne  themselves :  Salem 
having  granted  them  to  be  a  town  of  themselves  and  ap- 
pointed them  the  bounds  of  their  town  which  the  court  doth 
grant."  ^ 

■^  The  separation  of  Newton  from  Cambridge  presents  an 
excellent  illustration  of  the  manner  in  which  such  a  with- 
drawal was  effected.  In  1655  the  inhabitants  of  Cambridge, 
"  lying  remote  from  the  town  on  the  south  side  of  the 
River,"  petitioned  the  General  Court  for  permission  to  be- 
come a  village.,^  This  petition  was  immediately  referred 
to  a  committee  with  orders  to  examine  both  Cambridge  and 
the  petitioners  to  see  if  the  separation  were  desirable.  In 
1672  the  court  ordered  the  petitioners  and  a  committee 
from  Cambridge  to  appear  before  it  to  argue  the  case.  As 
the  result  of  this  meeting  Cambridge  made  certain  conces- 
sions to  the  petitioners,  but  did  not  grant  their  request. 
Among  other  things  she  allowed  them  the  privilege  gf  elect- 
ing annually  one  constable  and  three  selectmen,  but  com- 
pelled them  to  continue  paying  country  rates,  county 
rates  and  town  rates,  so  far  as  referred  to  the  grammar 

1  Salem  Town  Records,  vol.  i,  pp.  156-157. 

2  Mass  Col.  Rec,  vol.  2,  p.  262.  ^  ijjid.^  vol.  3,  p.  379. 


30  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [30 

school  and  the  bridge,  and  also  to  pay  their  share  of  the  ex- 
penses of  the  deputy  to  the  general  court/  With  these  con- 
cessions the  petitioners  were  not  satisfied,  and,  in  1678,  they 
again  lUid  the  matter  before  the  General  Court,  stating  that 
the  tax  upon  them  to  maintain  the  school  and  minister  was 
too  great  owing  to  their  losses  during  the  late  war.^  Cam- 
bridge again  argued  against  the  separation,  calling  the 
charges  absurd  and  maintaining  that  the  petitioners  had  no 
ground  for  complaint  since  they  knew  that  the  land  belonged 
to  Cambridge  before  they  settled  there.  In  spite  of  the 
protests  of  Cambridge,  however,  the  petition  was  granted 
in  the  following  year,  when  the  town  of  Newton  was  formed, 
'*  there  being  at  that  time  sixty  families  there."  The  boun- 
daries between  the  two  towns  were  settled  by  committees 
from  both  towns  and  the  court  incorporated  the  town, 
January  11,  1688. 

The  separation  of  the  Shawshin  grant  from  Cambridge 
is  also  a  good  illustration  of  the  formation  of  one  town 
from  another.  Various  conditions  had  from  time  to  time 
been  attached  to  the  acceptance  of  this  land  but  it  had  been 
finally  accepted  by  Cambridge  in  1643-44  with  the  condi- 
tion that  "  the  church  and  present  elders  continue  at  Cam- 
bridge." ^  By  1654,  its  inhabitants  had  become  dissatis- 
fied with  the  rule  of  Cambridge  and  that  year  sent  a  letter 
to  Cambridge  desiring  that  the  tract  of  land  upon  which 
they  dwelt  "  might  be  made  one  entire  body  of  itself,"  at 
the  same  time  petitioning  the  General  Court  to  the  same 
efifect.*  Cambridge  appointed  a  committee  of  five  men  "  to 
treat  &  conclude  with  the  inhabitants  of  Shawshin  Con- 
cerning this  request,"  ^  which  committee  on  January  29, 

1  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  4,  pt.  2,  p.  555. 

*  Mass.  Arch.,  vol.  112,  p.  253.  ^  Mass.  Col.  Rec.  vol.  2.  p.  62. 

*  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  106.  "  Ibid. 


31  ]  THE  TOWN  IN  GENERAL  3 1 

1654  presented  to  the  town  assembled  in  the  public  town 
meeting  the  following  proposition :  first,  That  all  land  in 
Shawshine  acquired  by  whatever  means  should  be  freed 
from  charges  to  Cambridge;  second,  that  all  inhabitants  of 
Cambridge  owning  property  in  Shawshine  should  pay  due 
charges  when  improvements  to  the  property  were  made; 
third,  that  the  inhabitants  of  Shawshine  should  release  all 
inhabitants  of  Cambridge  from  "  all  charges,  rates,  and 
dues."  Then  followed  two  minor  terms.  All  these  were 
approved  by  Shawshine  and  by  Cambridge  and,  by  mutual 
consent  of  the  inhabitants  of  Cambridge  and  of  Shawshine 
and,  with  the  sanction  of  the  general  court  Shawshine  separ- 
ated from  Cambridge  and  became  the  township  of  Bellerica.^  y 

In  1 66 1  "  Upon  the  request  of  several  of  the  inhabitants 
of  Dorchester  for  to  erect  a  vilage  at  Toleplaine  or  there- 
abouts," Dorchester  voted  that  it  was  willing  "  to  grant 
sufficient  land  at  the  place  aforesaid  (if  it  be  ther)  to  ac- 
commodate tw^enty  or  thirty  families  if  so  many  appear  suffi- 
cient to  cary  on  Church  and  Common  wealth  worke  and 
that  they  state  their  tearms  and  agree  with  such  as  the  town 
shall  appoint  for  that  end."  The  parties  desiring  the  village 
aforesaid  were  directed  to  repair  to  the  selectmen  at  a  con- 
venient time  and  state  their  terms,  to  which  the  selectmen 
were  desired  to  attend  and  to  propose  to  the  town  for  full 
confirmation  any  thing  upon  which  they  decided.^  . 

The  desire  for  separation  from  the  parent  town  can  usu- 
ally be  traced  to  the  inconvenience  caused  by  living  at  too 
great  a  distance  from  the  meeting  house, — the  centre  of  town 
life, — to  poor  communication,  and  to  oppressive  taxation  for 
purposes  not  beneficial  to  those  living  in  the  more  remote 
parts  of  the  town.    The  petition  sent  to  the  general  court, 

^  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  3,  pp.  390-391- 
2  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  109. 


32  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [32 

May  9,  1659,  by  the  inhabitants  of  Beverly  asking  permis- 
sion to  separate  from  Salem  voices  the  general  complaint: 
"  The  petition  of  the  inhabitants  of  that  part  of  Salem  upon 
the  north  side  of  the  ferry  toward  Ipswich.  We,  upwards  of 
sixty  families,  find  worship  at  Salem  very  troublesome  and 
dangerous.  .  .  We  have  supported  a  minister  for  five  years 
and  upwards  "  but  we  find  that  we  cannot  continue  in  this 
way  for  "  if  any  one  should  through  dissatisfaction  to  us  or 
unsoundness  in  judgment  or  otherwise  fall  off  from  us  and 
their  covenant,  we  by  this  gap  should  be  broken  to  pieces. 
These  considerations  move  us  humbly  to  pray  permission 
of  the  court  that  we  be  made  a  township  or  village  of  &  by 
ourselves."  ^  Milton,  in  petitioning  to  be  a  township,  gave 
for  its  reasons  that  distance  kept  its  settlers  from  church  and 
made  even  Dorchester  acknowledge  some  necessity  of  pro- 
curing and  settling  a  public  ministry  among  them.^  Salem 
village,  wishing  to  separate  from  Salem,  was  allowed  a  min- 
ister from  1671-72,  and  was  released  from  paying  the  Salem 
minister  although  required  to  pay  all  other  town  charges ;  a 
concession  which  induced  the  inhabitants  of  the  village  to 
postpone  their  attempt  to  separate  from  the  town  for  a 
while,  though  they  soon  insisted  upon  separation  for  the  rea- 
sons given  above.^  Cambridge  farms,  remote  from  the  meet- 
ing house,  asked  permission  in  1682  to  call  a  minister  to 
reside  among  them  and  to  hold  service  there  since  the  bad 
weather  and  the  distance  kept  them  from  attending  the 
church  at  Cambridge.  Cambridge  replied  that  it  was  un- 
willing to  grant  this  permission  as  in  bad  weather  the  in- 
habitants of  the  farms  could  go  to  Concord.  The  petition 
was,  however,  granted  by  the  General  Court.  ^ 

^  Essex  Institutes,  vol.  34,  pp.  232-234. 
^Mass.  Arch.,  vol.  112,  pp.  140-141. 
'  Mass.  Arch.,  vol.  24,  p.  28. 


33]  THE  TOWN  IN  GENERAL  33 

y.  The  settlement  of  Dorchester,  Roxbury,  Salem,  Cam- 
bridge, and  Watertown  illustrates  the  fact  that  settlements 
in  Massachusetts  were  made  by  groups,  "  by  congregations, 
by  neighborhoods,  by  families."  ^  Watertown  became  the 
home  of  a  congregation  from  Boxford,  Essex  County,  Eng- 
land, who  led  by  their  minister  Mr.  Phillips,  decided  "  to 
transplant  themselves  and  their  families  into  the  desert  of 
America."  ^  Dorchester  was  settled  by  a  group  of  "  west 
country  "  men,  who  resolved  to  live  together  in  the  new  land 
and  who  formed  a  church  before  leaving  Plymouth,  Eng- 
land ;  ^  Roxbury  by  a  group  of  men  the  majority  of  whom 
came  from  London  and  its  vicinity,  particularly  from  Maz- 
ing, Essex  County,  in  which  place  the  names  of  many  of  the 
original  settlers  of  Roxbury  may  be  found  on  the  church 
role  of  the  parish  church;* 'and  Cambridge  became  the 
home  "  of  the  Braintree  Company  which — was  August  14, 
1632  ordered  to  remove  to  New  Towne,"  and  later,  of  a 
company  led  by  Mr.  Shepard.  One  of  the  reasons  which 
Mr.  Shepard  gives  for  coming  to  New  England  is  that, 
"  Divers  people  in  Old  England,  of  my  dear  friends, 
desired  me  to  go  to  New-England  there  to  live  together; 
and  some  went  before,  and  writ  to  me  of  providing  a  place 
for  a  company  of  us ;  one  of  which  was  John  Bright ;  and 
I  saw  divers  of  my  Christian  friends  who  were  resolved  to 
go  thither  with  me."  He  described  the  arrival  at  Cam- 
bridge in  1635  as  follows,  "  When  we  had  been  here  two 
days,  upon  the  Monday,  October  5,  we  came,  (being  sent  for 
by  friends  at   Newtowne)    to  them,  to   my  brother  Mr. 

1  Osgood,   American   Colonies  in   the   Seventeenth   Century,  vol.    i, 
p.  425. 

2  Mather,  Magnalia,  vol,  i,  p.  340. 

3  Young's  Chronicles,  p.  345. 

*  Report  of  Boston  Record  Commissioners,  vol.  34,  pp.  9-10. 


34  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [34 

Stone's  house.  And  that  congregation  being  upon  their 
removal  to  Hartford  at  Connecticut,  myself  and  those  that 
came  with  me  found  many  houses  empty  and  many  persons 
willing  to  sell;  and  hence  our  companions  bought  off  their 
houses  to  dwell  in  until  he  should  see  another  place  fit  to 
remove  into.  But  having  here  some  time,  divers  of  our 
brethren  did  desire  to  set  still  and  not  to  remove  further."  ^ 
Salem  was  so  different  in  origin,  that  the  nature  of  its  settle- 
ment cannot  be  so  easily  classified.  Its  inhabitants  came 
from  many  quarters,  —  the  fisherman  from  Cape  Ann, 
Conant  and  his  followers,  Endicott  and  the  men  who  came 
from  England  with  him,  the  three  hundred  settlers  sent  out 
by  the  Massachusetts  Company,  and  finally,  some  members 
of  the  company  that  came  over  with  Winthrop.  These  differ- 
ent groups,  however,  from  the  time  of  the  fishermen  until 
Winthrop's  company  came  were  formed  of  men  more  or  less 
acquainted,  so  that  this  settlement  differs  only  slightly  from 
the  one  just  mentioned. 

The  first  inhabitants  of  Salem  settled  on  the  "  middle 
neck  of  land  "  where  they  were  very  pleasantly  situated 
having  "  A  South  river  on  the  one  side,  and  a  North  river 
on  the  other  side."  ^  The  soil  was  sandy,  but  produced 
good  crops :  "  for  seven  years  together  it  hath  brought  forth 
exceeding  good  corne  by  being  fished  but  every  three  years," 
wrote  a  visitor  in  the  early  years  of  the  colony.  There 
were  two  good  harbors,  "  a  store  of  fish,  and  good  timber  in 
places."*  This  original  site  of  the  town  has  "ever  re- 
mained its  nucleus  and  central  body."  *     The  early  settlers 

1  Savage's  Winthrop,  vol.  i,  .p  87,  and  also,  Young's  Chronicles,  pp. 

529-545- 

2  Wood's,  New  Eng.  Prospect  in  Young's  Chronicles,  p.  409. 

8  Ibid.,  pp.  409-410. 

*  Essex  Institute,  vol.  19,  p.  168. 


35]  THE  TOWN  IN  GENERAL  35 

lived  somewhat  scattered,  their  home  lots  facing  the  North 
and  South  rivers, — turning  their  backs  to  each  other.  On 
the  bank  of  each  river  was  a  highway  which  was  "  main- 
tained by  all  such  as  have  houses  and  house  lots  next  the 
water  side,"  and  which  was  required  to  be  "  at  least  8  foote 
broad."  At  that  point  where  the  rivers  came  nearest  to- 
gether the  highways  were  connected  by  a  way  called  School- 
house  lane  (the  present  Washington  Street)  and  perhaps 
by  a  second  lane.^  In  the  rear  of  the  home  lots  separ- 
ating those  facing  the  North  river  from  those  facing  the 
South  river  was  a  highway  called  Main  Street,  probably 
the  present  Essex  Street.^ 

The  first  settlers  of  Dorchester  "  took  up  every  one  his 
spot  to  set  down  upon  pretty  thick  together  at  ye  northerly 
end  of  ye  towne  next  to  ye  aforesaid  neck  of  Land  and  on 
ye  Easterly  side  next  to  the  sea  leaving  many  intervening 
spots  of  land  between  their  settlements."  ^  This  site  is  now 
in  South  Boston  on  the  rising  ground  south  of  Old  Harbor. 
The  first  meeting  house,  always  near  the  center  of  the  town, 
was  at  the  northern  end  of  the  plain  now  called  Pleasant 
Street,  and  close  by  it  was  the  first  place  of  burial,  of  which 
no  trace  remains.  The  first  road  was  the  present  Pleasant 
St.,  from  Staughton  to  Cottage  St.*  By  1633  Dorchester 
had  become  in  extent  the  largest  town  in  New  England,  well 
wooded  and  watered,  having  good  arable  ground,  fair  corn 
fields,  and  pleasant  gardens.^ 

1  Webber  and  Nevins,  Old  Naumkeag,  p.  28. 

2  Felt,  Annals  of  Salem,  vol,  i,  p.  283,  and  Essex  Institute,  vol. 
19,  p.  168. 

8  Annals  of  Dorchester,  p.   10. 

*  Edward  Everett,  Oration  delivered  on  the  Fourth  of  July,  1855, 
p.  27  et  seq. 

5  Young's  Chronicles,  p.  395,  and  Memorial  History  of  Boston,  vol. 
I.  P-  435. 


36  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [35 

The  land  around  Mt.  Auburn — east,  north  and  south — is 
undoubtedly  the  place  of  the  early  settlement  of  Watertown 
and  was  called  "  the  town  "  at  an  early  date.  It  is  con- 
jectured that  the  lot  of  Mr.  Phillips  opposite  the  old  burial 
ground  was  the  centre  of  the  town  and  that  the  first  meeting- 
house was  there. ^  The  home  lots  were  scattered  around 
the  eastern  part  of  the  grant  between  the  Charles  river  and 
the  Cambridge  line  and  were  surrounded  on  the  north  and 
northwest  by  the  **  Great  Dividents  "  or  pasture  lands  and 
on  the  southwest  by  Beaver  Brook  plough  lands.  The  east- 
ern boundary  is  supposed  to  have  corresponded  very  nearly 
with  the  present  Vassal  land  and  Sparks  Street,  X3ambridge, 
beginning  at  the  southeast  side  of  East  Bay,  Fresh  Pond,  and 
running  to  the  most  northerly  part  in  the  bend  of  the  river.^- 
By  1 63 1  there  were  one  hundred  and  sixty  families  in  the 
town  and  "  neere  vpon  1800  Acres  in  tillage."  ^  The  town 
was  very  straggling  having  one  main  street  called  Mill 
Street,  now  Mt.  Auburn,*  running  from  east  to  west  almost 
through  its  centre  and  many  less  important  roads  branching 
from  this  in  all  directions.  Only  two  other  streets  seemed 
to  have  been  named — Hill  and  Spring — both  running 
parallel  to  each  other  in  a  northerly  direction  starting  from 
Main  St.,  nearly  in  the  centre  of  the  easterly  part  of  the 
town  where  the  home  lots  were. 

The  original  settlement  in  Roxbury  was  made  in  the  east- 
ern section  of  the  town,  east  of  the  site  of  the  present  First 
Church.  From  the  town  street,  now  called  Roxbury  Street, 
settlers  gradually  wandered  off  in  all  directions  toward  the 
neighboring  towns.  *"     In  the  seventeenth  century  Roxbury 

1  Drake,  op.  cit.  ^  Ibid.,  p.  435- 

*  Wonder  Working  Providence,  p.  46. 

*  Drake,  op.  cit. 

^Report  of  the  Boston  Record  Commissioners,  vol.  34,  p.  11. 


;^y]  THE  TOWN  IN  GENERAL  37 

was  a  "  fair  and  handsome  country  town  "  the  inhabitants 
of  which  had  fair  houses,  a  store  of  cattle,  impaled  corn 
fie^ds,  and  fruitful  gardens/ 

^  Houses  in  these  seventeenth  century  towns  were  placed 
within  a  reasonable  distance  of  each  other,  care  being  taken 
that  all  available  locations  within  the  town  limits  were  occu- 
pied before  settlers  were  allowed  to  scatter.  Cambridge, 
in  1632,  agreed  "by  a  joynt  Consent"  that  the  "  Towne 
shall  not  bee  Inlarged  until  all  the  place  be  filled  with 
houses;"^  and  Watertown,  in  1638,  declared  that  it  was 
their  "  reall  intent  to  sitt  down  there  close  together,"  that 
is,  near  the  "  Towne  plot."  ^  ^  Houses  were  built  of  wood 
and,  at  first,  were  roofed  with  thatch.  This  however  soon 
proved  too  dangerous  and  the  towns  ordered  other  material 
to  be  used,  Cambridge  in  1632  ruling  that  all  houses  with- 
in her  bounds  must  be  "  covered  with  slate  or  board."  * 
This  change  in  roofing  was  due  to  a  disastrous  fire  that 
occurred  in  Boston,  which  also  caused  the  town  to  forbid 
any  child  under  ten  years  of  age  to  carry  fire  from  one 
house  to  another  and  anyone  else  to  carry  it  unless  the  fire 
were  covered."  The  towns  were  kept  in  good  order. 
Fences  were  kept  up,  animals  were  not  allowed  to  run  at 
large  through  the  streets,  lots  within  the  town  limits  were 
not  allowed  to  remain  unimproved  and  streets  were  kept  in 
good  repair  and  clean.  Cambridge  ordered  that,  "  Every 
Inhabitant  in  the  Towne  shall  keep  the  highway  Cleane 
from  wood  and  all  other  things  against  his  owne  Ground, 
and  whosoever  shall  haue  anythinge  lye  in  the  street  "  shall 
be  fined.®     Houses  were  built  with  some  reference  to  the 

^  Wood,    New   Eng.    Prospect;    Young's    Chronicles,    p.    396;    Me- 
morial History  of  Boston,  vol.   i,  p.  401. 
2  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  4.    ^  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  4. 
*  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  4. 
^  lb.,  p.  23.  «  Ibid.,  pp.  4-10. 


38  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [38 

appearance  of  the  town.  Cambridge  agreed  upon  a  build- 
ing line  and  compelled  all  those  building  within  its  limits 
to  abide  by  it ; — houses  shall  "  Range  even  and  stand  Just 
six  "  feet  in  their  "  Owne  ground  from  the  street."  ^ 

Disagreements  between  different  towns  came  within  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  General  Court  and  were  settled  by  that 
body,  usually  through  committees  appointed  for  that  pur- 
pose.    However,  if  the  decision  reached  by  such  committees 
did  not  meet  with  the  approval  of  the  towns,  the  case  could 
be  referred  again  to  the  court.    In  1639  the  court  appointed 
three  men  to  "  view  the  difference  between  Dorchester  and 
Boston  .  .  .  and  to  give  their  advise  which,  if  it  satisfy  not, 
may  be  returned  to  the  court,  and  if  the  other  party  be 
grieved  to  prosecute  his  suit  &  have  it  tryed  by  a  jury  & 
this  committee  to  give  evidence."  ^    In  1655  the  court  ap-  ^ 
pointed  a  committee  to  adjust  the  difference  between  Cam- 
bridge and  "  some  farmes  on  the  south  side  of  the  riuer,"  ^ 
and  in  1659  a  committee  to  settle  the  trouble  between  New- 
town and  Watertown  over  their  boundaries.* 
^    Each  town  had  its  share  in  governing  the  colony  through 
the  deputies  which  it  sent  yearly  to  the  general  court.     This 
privilege  was  granted  the  towns.  May  14,  1634,  when  the 
general  court  ordered,  "  that  it  shall  be  lawfuU  for  the  free- 
men of  every  plantation  to  chuse  two  or  three  of  each  towne 
before  every  Generall  Court  to  confer  of  &  prepare  such 
public  business  as  by  them  shalle  be  thought  fit  to  consider 
of  at  the  next  Generall  Court  ...  to  have  full  power  & 
voice  of  all  the  said  freemen  ...  for  the  making  &  establish- 
ing of  lawes,  granting  of  lands,  and  to  deal  in  all  other  af- 
fairs of  the  commonwealth  wherein  the  freemen  have  to  do, 

1  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  4. 

2  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  260. 

8  Ibid.,  vol.  3,  p.  396.  *  Mass.  Arch.,  vol.  112,  p.  4. 


39]  THE  TOWN  IN  GENERAL  ^g 

the  matter  of  election  of  magistrates  &  other  officers  only 
excepted  wherein  every  freemen  is  to  give  his  own  voice."  * 
In  1636  the  court  decided  that  the  deputies  from  the  town 
should  be  proportioned  as  follows:  every  town  containing 
from  ten  to  twenty  freemen  should  send  one  deputy;  every 
town  containing  between  twenty  and  forty  freemen  should 
send  two  deputies;  and  every  town  containing  more  than 
forty  freemen  should  send  three;  those  having  less  than 
ten  freemen  could  not  send  a  deputy.^  In  1638  the  court 
changed  this  ruling  and  decided  that  no  town  should 
send  more  than  two  deputies.  Some  of  the  towns  con- 
sidered this  number  excessive,  probably  on  account  of  the 
expense,  and  a  controversy  arose  which  was  settled  in  1647- 
1648  by  allowing  each  town  to  send  one  or  more  deputies 
as  it  pleased.^  Salem  sent  sometimes  one,  sometimes  two  * 
deputies;  Dorchester,  usually  two;  Watertown  and  Rox- 
bury,  usually  two  and  Cambridge  sometimes  one  and  again 
two.  There  was  a  tendency  in  all  towns  to  reappoint  the 
same  men  as  deputies  year  after  year.'  Dorchester  sent  a 
certain  Mr.  Atherton  in  1645-1646  and  1648;  Salem,  a  cer- 
tain Mr.  Hawthorne  during  these  same  years;  and  Rox- 
bury,  a  certain  Mr.  Johnson  and  a  certain  Mr.  Parkes ;  but 
Cambridge  and  Watertown  during  these  years  changed 
their  deputies  annually.^    '^^ 

The  deputies  were  paid  by  the  towns  sending  them.  The 
General  Court  in  1638  ordered  that  the  towns  should 
pay  3S-6d  per  day  for  a  magistrate  and  2s-6d  for  a  deputy, 
"  from  the  time  of  their  going  out  to  the  court  untill  their 

'^Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  118. 

^Ihid.,  vol.  I,  p.  178. 

^  Ibid.,  vol.  I,  p.  254;  vol.  2,  p.  217. 

*  Ibid.,  vol.  3,  pp.  422-9-62. 

'^  Ibid.,  vol.  3,  pp.  9-62. 


40  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [40 

returne."  ^  Roxbury,  in  1665,  ordered  that  each  should 
have  three  shilHngs  per  day,  but  in  1689-90  allowed  them 
only  eighteen  pence  per  day.^  Both  the  town  and  the 
colony  endeavored  to  keep  the  expense  of  sending  the  de- 
puties as  small  as  possible/ 

Deputies  were  elected  by  the  town  meeting,  that  is  by  the 
town  meeting  composed  of  freemen  alone.  The  warrant 
for  the  election  of  deputies  was  sent  to  the  constable  of  the 
town  and  he  called  the  town  meeting  to  choose  these  offi- 
cers. In  1660  the  following  warrant  was  sent  to  the  con- 
stable of  Roxbury: 
"  To  the  constable  of  Roxbury  : — 

You  are  by  virtue  of  an  order  of  the  Councile  of  this 
Jurisdiction,  Assembled  at  Boston  this  7th  of  December 
1660  hereby  required  on  sight  thereof  to  Assemble  the  Free- 
men, of  the  Towne  together  &  signify  to  them  that  they  are 
by  virtue  of  the  above  mentioned  order  required  to  choose 
according  to  law  Entitled  Deputies,  page  25  new  book,  &, 
send  theire  Deputy  or  Deputies  to  meet  at  Boston  ye  19th 
of  this  instant,  December,  at  one  of  ye  clock  in  ye  after- 
noon." * 

Whenever  possible,  the  town  purchased  from  its  Indian 
owners  the  title  to  the  land  upon  which  it  settled.  This  in- 
deed was  a  general  policy  of  the  colony.  Higginson  says, 
"  I  did  certainly  know  that  from  the  beginning  our  fathers 
entered  upon  the  land  partly  as  a  wilderness  and  partly  by 
the  consent  of  the  Indians  and  therefore  care  was  taken 
to  treat  with  them  and  to  gain  their  consent."  '^     It  is  not 

^Mass,  Col.  Rec,  vol,  i,  p.  228. 
^Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  144. 

8  Mass.  Arch.,  vol.  48,  p.  29.  *  Ibid.,  vol.  106,  p.  27. 

^Revolution  of  New  Eng.  Justified,  p.  19;  Felt,  Annals  of  Salem, 
vol.   I,  p.  24. 


41  ]  THE  TOWN  IN  GENERAL  41 

necessary  to  give  here  other  quotations  to  substantiate  this 
statement,  as  it  can  be  proved  by  reference  to  any  history 
of  Massachusetts.  The  tov^ns  followed  this  rule  carefully. 
Dorchester  in  1636  bought  from  the  Indian  Sachem,  Kitcha- 
makin,  the  land  "  beyond  the  mill  to  the  remotest  part  "  re- 
ceiving from  him  a  deed  for  the  property/  This  deed  reads 
as  follows :  "  This  Indenture  made  the  8th  of  October  in 
the  year  1636  betwixt  Richard  Collecott  and  Kitchamakin 
sachem  of  Massachusetts  witnesseth  their  presents  that  I 
Kitchanakin  do  covenant  grant,  and  sell  unto  Richard  Colli- 
cott  of  Dorchester  all  that  parcel  of  Land  beyond  the  Mill 
within  the  bound  of  Dorchester  to  the  utmost  extent  for 
the  use  of  the  plantation  of  Dorchester  for  they  and  their 
heirs  for  ever  only  reserving  for  my  own  use  and  my  men 
forty  acres  where  I  like  best  and  in  case  I  and  they  leave  it 
the  same  also  to  belonge  unto  Dorchester  giving  some  Con- 
sideration for  the  Paines  bestowed  about  it — and  I  the  said 
Kitchamakin  do  acknowledge  to  have  received  the  value  of 
411  Twenty  eight  Fathoms  of  Wampam  being  the  Full  Pay- 
ment of  the  .  .  .  .  and  I  the  said  Kitchamakin  do  acknowl- 
edge myself  satisfied  as  witness  whereof  the  present  In- 
denture I  have  sett  my  hand  the  Daye  and  years  aboue 
written."  ' 

the  mark  of  Kitchamakin. 
The  original  indenture  was  not  kept  with  much  care, 
and  by  1649  it  was  scarcely  legible;  so  in  order  to  have  a 
fair  copy  the  above  indenture  was  drawn  up  and  signed 
voluntarily  by  Kitchamakin.^  By  1663  there  was  trouble 
with  the  Indians,  the  successors  of  Kitchamakin,  and  Dor- 
chester appointed  four  men  to  meet  with  the  then  sachem 

^Mass.  Arch.,  vol.  30,  p.  15. 
^Dorchester  Town  Records,  pp.  142-143. 
8  Ibid.,  p.  143. 


42  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [42 

Josiah  "  and  others  on  the  26th  of  this  Instant  and  to 
treat  with  him,  to  see  what  they  demanded;  as  respecting 
any  of  Dorchester  Land;  and  to  make  full  and  complete 
agreement,  if  they  see  their  demands  be  but  reason;  and  for 
that  end  they  take  copies  of  the  Deed  from  Kitsamichin  and 
other  writing;  and  whatever  helps  they  shall  think  needful 
to  call  with  them  to  further  the  business ;  and  if  they  see  not 
cause  to  issue  the  matter,  then  to  make  report  to  the  Towne 
for  further  consideration."  ^  No  report  was  made  to  the 
town,  so  the  committee  evidently  settled  the  matter. 

When  the  settlers  arrived  at  Salem  very  few  Indians 
were  found  in  its  vicinity.  Those  that  were  there  "  were 
very  glad  that  we  came  to  dwell  among  them,"  says  Wil- 
liam Dixy,  who  came  to  America  in  1629."  This  pleasure 
Dixy  ascribes  to  the  fear  which  the  Indians  on  the  coast 
felt  towards  those  farther  inland.  These  Indians  gave  the 
English  settlers  full  liberty  to  take  possession  of  the  land, 
the  English  in  return  giving  them  full  satisfaction  for  what- 
ever land  they  occupied.  From  them,  Salem,  in  1688,  secured 
a  deed  for  the  land  upon  which  the  town  was  situated,  pay- 
ing twenty  pounds  for  all  the  land  included  in  the  township 
of  Salem — "  all  that  tract  of  land  lying  to  the  west  of 
Naumkeag  River  and  along  it  to  the  sea."  ^ 

Roxbury  voted  in  1685-86  to  secure  from  the  grandson 
"  Charles  Josiah  "  of  Chickatabut  the  Indian  sachem  "  of 
these  parts  of  the  country  "  a  title  for  the  land  occupied  by 
the  town.  *  A  committee  was  appointed  to  see  that  this  was 
done  and,  January  13,  1689-90,  the  deeds  for  Roxbury  and 
New  Roxbury  were  taken  from  the  keeping  of  private  in- 

1  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  126. 

2  Felt,  Annals  of  Salem,  vol.  i,  pp.  120-121. 
« Ibid.,  vol.  I,  p.  28,  et.  seq. 

*  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  126. 


43]  THE  TOWN  IN  GENERAL  43 

dividuals  and  given  into  the  custody  of  the  town  clerk/ 
Roxbury  showed  the  same  care  in  securing  a  title  from  the 
Indians  for  the  settlement  it  made  among  the  Nipniucks.  A 
committee  of  the  general  court  in  168 1  investigated  the  claims 
which  the  Indians  had  to  that  part  of  the  country,  calling 
a  general  meeting  of  all  the  Indians  interested.  So  many 
conflicting  claims  were  found  that  the  Indians  were  dis- 
missed and  given  time  to  adjust  these  claims  among  them- 
selves. When  they  had  done  this,  they  appeared  again  be- 
fore the  committee  of  the  General  Court  which  found  some 
of  their  claims  against  the  colony  just  and  thereupon  paid 
the  claimants.^  The  Indian  claims  to  the  lands  upon  which 
Cambridge  and  Watertown  were  situated  were  settled  in 
1638  by  order  of  the  General  Court.  In  that  year  the  court 
desired  a  certain  Mr.  Gibson  "  to  agree  with  the  Indians  for 
the  lands  within  the  bounds  of  Watertown,  Cambridge  and 
Boston."  ^  This  he  did  by  paying  to  the  Indians  28£-8s-6d, 
which  sum  the  towns  returned  to  him  in  obedience  to  an 
order  of  the  court  passed  May  13,  1640,  Watertown  pay- 
ing i3£-8s-6d  and  Cambridge  io£  and  in  addition  a  "  coat 
to  Squa  Sachem  every  winter  while  she  liveth."  * 

^Roxbury  Town  Records,  p."  145. 

^  Mass,  Arch.,  vol.  70,  p.  264. 

3  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  254.  *  Ibid. 


-i 


CHAPTER  II 
Town  Courts 

The  judicial  system  of  the  seventeenth  century  town  was 
so  interwoven  with  that  of  the  colony  that  the  one  cannot  be 
separated  from  the  other.  Then  the  town  did  not  have  the 
same  control  over  the  administration  of  justice  within  its 
bounds  which  it  possessed  in  the  other  departments  of  town 
life.  The  authority  to  punish  offenders  against  town  or- 
ders or  the  law  of  the  colony  came  from  the  General  Court, 
while  the  power  to  establish  local  courts  and  to  appoint 
judicial  officers  remained  with  that  body  throughout  the 
century.  The  only  power  given  the  towns  was  that  of 
nominating  to  these  positions  men  whom  they  thought 
worthy  to  fill  them.  Even  in  determining  the  punishment 
to  be  inflicted,  the  town  had  very  little  power,  for,  after  es- 
tablishing local  courts,  the  General  Courts  defined  carefully 
what  cases  lay  within  their  jurisdiction  and  limited  the 
punishments  they  could  impose. 

The  entire  judicial  system  of  the  colony  was  developed 
gradually.  The  charter  of  the  company  gave  it  no  power 
to  establish  courts  or  to  try  offenders  against  its  orders. 
But  the  authorities  of  the  company  assumed  this  power  and 
courts  were  established  and  officers  with  judicial  power 
appointed  whenever  and  wherever  the  welfare  of  the  colony 
demanded  them.  During  the  few  years  immediately  follow- 
ing the  settlement  of  the  towns,  there  were  no  local  courts. 
The  towns  were  so  small  and  were  situated  in  such  close 
proximity  to  each  other  and  to  Boston,  that  cases  arising 
44  [44 


45]  TOWN  COURTS  45 

in  them  were  easily  carried  to  that  town  for  trial.  During 
this  time  the  General  Court  and  the  Court  of  Assistants 
were  the  only  courts  in  the  colony.  Of  these,  the  latter 
soon  became  the  most  important,  as  the  former  developed 
more  and  more  into  a  purely  legislative  body  after  the  in- 
troduction into  it  of  deputies  in  1634.  Throughout  the 
seventeenth  century,  the  Court  of  Assistants  remained  the 
highest  regular  judicial  court  of  the  colony.^  Until  1649 
it  met  four  times  annually,  in  June,  September,  December 
and  March,  and  after  that  held  two  regular  sessions, 
one  in  the  spring  and  one  in  the  fall.^ 

In  1635  four  other  courts  were  created.  These  met  at  Ips- 
wich, Salem,  NewTowne, — to  which  jurisdiction  Watertown 
belonged, —  and  Boston.  To  the  last  named  jurisdiction  Rox- 
bury  belonged.  They  were  kept  by  "  such  magistrates  as 
dwelt  in  or  near  the  said  towns,  and  by  such  other  persons 
of  worth  as  were  from  time  to  time  appointed  by  the  Gen- 
eral Court,  provided  that  no  Court  were  kept  without  one 
magistrate  at  the  least."  From  men  nominated  by  the 
several  towns  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  court  the  magis- 
trate who  was  to  hold  the  court  chose  his  associates.  The 
number  chosen  had  to  be  large  enough  to  admit  of  there 
being  five  in  each  court.  Any  three,  of  whom  one  was  a 
magistrate,  could  hold  court. ^  These  courts  had  jurisdiction 
over  all  civil  cases  whereof  the  debt  or  damage  did  not  ex- 
ceed ten  pounds,  and  all  criminal  cases  "  not  concerning  life 
member  or  banishment."  Cases  could  be  appealed  from 
them  to  the  "great  quarter  courts."  They  met  "the  i, 
the  last  Tuesday  in  June,  and  the  rest  the  last  Tuesday  in 
euy  of  the  said  moneths," — September,  December,  and 
March. 

1  Osgood,   American   Colonies  in   the   Seventeenth   Century,  vol.   i, 

p.  185. 

2  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  169.  » Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  175. 


46  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [46 

In  1639,  when  four  counties  were  formed,  —  Suffolk, 
Middlesex,  Essex,  and  Norfolk — a  court  was  established  in 
each.  Each  of  these  was  held  by  a  magistrate  living  within 
the  county  or  by  magistrates  appointed  from  time  to  time 
by  the  General  Court,  together  with  men  nominated  by  the 
freemen  of  the  towns  and  appointed  by  the  General  Court. 
These  were  like  the  Quarter  Sessions  in  England.  They 
looked  out  for  the  welfare  of  the  county,  supervising  the 
laying  out  of  highways,  licensing  houses  of  entertainment, 
and  inquiring  into  the  ministers'  support.^  Cases  could  be 
appealed  from  these  courts  to  the  Court  of  Assistants. 

At  first  there  were  no  written  laws  upon  which  the  judges 
could  base  their  decision.  An  order  of  1636  describes  the 
way  in  which  the  magistrates  at  this  time  decided  cases. 
This  states  that  they  heard  and  decided  cases  according  to 
English  law,  and  when  that  law  did  not  cover  the  case  in 
question  they  decided  it  "  as  near  the  law  of  God  as  they 
could."  ^  But  Englishmen,  with  the  traditions  of  centuries 
back  of  them,  were  not  the  people  to  submit  to  laws  made 
by  the  judges  who  also  tried  violations  of  them  and  there- 
fore an  agitation  was  begun  which  culminated  in  1641  in  the 
framing  of  the  code  of  laws  known  as  the  Body  of  Liberties. 

The  colonial  courts,  however,  were  soon  so  overworked 
with  the  number  of  cases  coming  before  them,  that  the  ad- 
ministration of  justice  was  hindered.  In  order  to  secure 
more  swift  punishment  for  crime  new  courts  were  estab- 
lished. From  the  beginning  of  the  colony,  each  Assistant 
had  had  the  power  of  a  magistrate  in  the  town  where  he 
lived,  but  by  this  time  not  every  town  was  fortunate  enough 
to  have  an   Assistant   among  its   inhabitants.     Therefore 

1  Washburn,  Judicial  History  of  Massachusetts,  p.  30 ;   Osgood,  op. 
cit.  vol.  I,  p.  191. 
^  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  174. 


47]  TOWN  COURTS  47 

inferior  judicial  officers  were  appointed  in  1636  to  try  minor 
offences  in  the  towns  where  they  were  committed,  and  at 
the  same  time,  the  selectmen  of  each  town  were  empowered 
to  try  offences  against  the  bylaws  of  the  town  when  the 
penalty  did  not  exceed  twenty  shillings.  Their  power,  how- 
ever, could  not  extend  to  any  criminal  offense/  The  first 
Court  of  Assistants,  on  August  23,  1630,  had  appointed 
some  minor  officers  called  justices  of  the  peace,  but  this 
seems  to  have  been  the  only  time  this  was  done.  This  court 
at  the  same  time,  however,  ordered  that  the  governor  and 
the  deputy  governor  should  "  always  be  justices  of  ye 
peace;"  and  defined  the  power  of  this  officer  as  follows — 
"  in  all  things  to  have  like  power  as  justices  of  peace  have 
in  England  for  reformation  of  abuses  and  punishing  of  of- 
fenders, and  that  any  justice  of  the  peace  may  imprison  an 
offender  but  not  infiict  any  corporal  punishment  without 
presence  &  consent  of  some  one  of  the  Assistants."  ^ 

After  the  power  of  trying  and  punishing  offences  against 
the  by-laws  of  the  town  was  bestowed  upon  the  selectmen, 
the  records  of  their  meetings  read  like  the  records  of  a 
police  court.  This  however  is  not  true  to  an  equal  degree 
of  all  towns.  The  selectmen  of  Cambridge  devoted  a  large 
part  of  each  meeting  to  this  duty,  while  the  selectment  of 
Dorchester  and  Salem  punished  only  an  occasional  offense. 
This  activity  of  the  selectmen  of  Cambridge  was  probably 
due  to  the  fact  that  that  town  expressly  instructed  its  select- 
men to  punish  any  violation  of  the  town  orders.  In  1652 
the  town  meeting,  in  delegating  certain  powers  to  the 
selectmen,  instructed  them  among  other  things  "  to  make 
such  wholesome  orders  and  impose  such  penalties  and  duly 
punish  and  execute  the  same  as  may  best  affect  "  the  wel- 
fare of  the  town.* 

1  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  172.  -  Ibid.,  p.  74. 

«  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  100. 


48  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [48 

Cases  coming  before  the  selectmen  for  trial  included  of- 
fenses against  town  orders,  such  as  gathering  wood  in  for- 
bidden places,  pasturing  cattle  in  places  not  opened  by  town 
order,  violating  the  order  regulating  the  common  herd,  or 
failing  to  repair  fences  or  highways  when  notified  to  do  so. 
The  following  record  of  a  selectmen's  meeting  in  Cam- 
bridge is  typical  of  that  phase  of  the  selectmen's  duty.  "At 
a  meeting  of  the  selectmen  in  1646  several  men  fined  for 
breaking  the  order  concerning  oxen  and  hogs. 

s  d 

Bro :  Cooper  fined  for  4  oxen  once  &  3  another 02  00 

Bro :  Winthrop :  fined  for  4  oxen  twice  &  his  hogs 03  00 

Will :  Man,  for  one  hog  twice  without  keeper 00  06 

and  so  on  through  the  list  of  punishments  meted  out  to 
thirty-five  men.^  In  Watertown,  in  1649,  the  selectmen 
fined  one  Joseph  Bennet,  "  for  felling  of  twelve  trees  upon 
the  common  and  highway,  three  pounds ;"  ^  and  a  certain 
man  for  "  not  attending  his  service  in  the  highwayes."  ^ 

Occasionally  the  selectmen  seemed  to  feel  themselves  in- 
adequate to  deal  with  a  case.  They  then  left  it  to  the 
consideration  of  the  whole  town.  The  selectmen  of  Water- 
town,  in  1663,  in  the  case  of  one  Joseph  Tainter  who  was 
complained  of  "  for  taking  in  of  5  or  6  foot  of  the  highway 
both  of  the  south  and  east  side  of  his  house,"  refused  to 
decide  the  case  and  left  it  to  the  town.*  In  1662,  when 
an  inhabitant  of  Dorchester,  one  John  Plumbs,  was  fined 
by  the  selectmen  for  "felling  trees  in  the  500  acres"  and  he 
objected  to  paying  this  fine,  the  selectmen  referred  the  case 
to  the  town.''     In  Roxbury,  in  1661,  the  freemen  of  the 

1  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  54. 

2  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  19. 

^  Ibid.,  p.  33;  Dorchester  Town  Records,  pp.  168-169. 
*  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  76. 
^  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  1 14. 


49]  TOWN  COURTS  49 

town  were  called  upon  to  settle  a  case  between  the  select- 
men and  the  inhabitants  about  a  highway  at  the  further 
side  of  the  great  lots;  ^  and  Cambridge,  in  1649,  was  called 
upon  to  settle  a  dispute  between  the  townsmen  and  a  certain 
Christopher  Gore,  referring  the  matter  ''  to  the  hearing  and 
determination  "  of  two  men  appointed  for  that  purpose.^ 

When  pimishing  a  misdemeanor,  not  only  against  a  town 
ordinance  but  against  a  colony  law,  the  selectmen  frequently 
inforced  their  decisions  by  threatening  the  offender  with 
the  authority  of  a  higher  tribunal.  Dorchester,  in  1672, 
when  ordering  a  certain  woman  to  leave  the  town  because 
she  threatened  to  become  a  burden  upon  its  charity  advised 
her  to  hasten,  upon  the  "  penalty  by  the  town  orders  in  that 
Case  provided  of  being  complained  of  further  to  Au- 
thority." ^ 

The  first  purely  local  judicial  office  to  be  created  was 
that  of  the  commissioners  of  small  causes,  in  May,  1636. 
These  commissioners  had  power  to  hear  and  determine 
criminal  cases  and  other  offenses,  such  as  absence  from 
church,  drunkenness,  "  lyers,  swearing,  sabbath  breaking, 
and  to  give  oath  to  any  officer  in  the  town."  In  1638 
the  General  Court  decided  how  these  commissioners  of  small 
causes  should  be  appointed,  ordering  that  "  in  such  towns 
where  no  magistrate  dwells,  the  general  court  shall  from 
time  to  time  nominate  three  men,  .  .  .  two  of  whom  shall 
have  power  to  hear  and  determine  such  actions  under 
twenty  shillings, — later  under  40.  Cases  may  be  appealed 
from  their  decision  to  the  next  quarter  court  or  to  the  court 
of  assistance."  The  town  presented  to  the  general  court 
the  names  of  those  it  wished  appointed  to  this  office.     The 

1  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  32. 

2  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  83. 

3  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  185. 


50  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [^q 

form  of  the  petition  was  as  follows :  "  The  town  of — de- 
sires that  the  three  persons  named  .  .  .  may  order  small 
causes  for  the  year  ensueing."  ^  To  their  original  duties 
others  were  occasionally  added.  Dorchester,  in  1661,  sent 
the  following  request  to  the  General  Court ;  "The  inhabitants 
of  Dorchester  have  chosen  certain  three  men  Commis- 
sioners to  end  small  causes  in  Dorchester  and  their  humble 
request  is  that  the  honored  court  would  authorize  one  of 
the  three  said  persons  to  join  persons  for  marriage  for  the 
said  town."  ^  When  one  of  the  commissioners  was  a  party 
in  a  case,  the  selectmen  were  authorized  to  act  as  judges. 
The  jurisdiction  of  the  commissioners  of  small  causes  was 
confined  to  their  own  towns,  but  when  the  parties  to  a  suit 
lived  in  different  towns  the  plaintiff  had  the  right  to  choose 
the  town  in  which  the  trial  should  be  held.^  They  could 
not  enforce  any  judgment  by  imprisonment,  and  when  the 
ofifender  had  no  property  they  could  only  remit  the  case  to 
the  county  court.* 

Commissioners  of  small  causes  are  not  mentioned  in  the 
history  of  Cambridge  until  1641,  and  then  the  General 
Court  appointed  three  for  the  town.  The  first  mention  of 
them  in  the  town  records  is  in  1648,  but  after  that  time 
they  were  chosen  annually  in  town  meeting.  In  Water- 
town  they  were  elected  by  the  "  bodie  of  the  freemen,"  and 
in  1659  held  four  meetings  during  the  year, — on  the  first 
Monday  of  May,  of  August,  of  November,  and  of  Febru- 
ary.'^  The  commissioners  of  small  causes  in  Dorchester 
agreed  in  1661  "  to  meet  for  the  Clearing  of  causes  if  any 
appear  in  the  days  following  viz. :  the  first  sixth  day  in  the 
Second  moneth,  the  first  sixth  day  in  the  fifth  month,  the 

1  Mass.  Arch.,  vol.  B.  38,  p.  9.  *  ^^id.,  vol.  39,  p.  140. 

8  Osgood,  op.  cit.,  vol.  I,  p.  191.  *  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  192. 

5  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  61. 


51  ]  TOWN  COURTS  51 

first  sixth  day  of  the  eighth  month,  the  first  sixth  day  of 
the  eleventh  month  and  the  place  of  Meeting  to  be  at 
Thomas  Swifts,  Sr."  ^  In  the  Records  of  Salem  the  com- 
missioners are  first  mentioned  in  1653,  although  they  were 
chosen  by  the  General  Court  for  the  town  for  many  years 
previous  to  that  date.  After  this  time  they  were  elected 
annually  in  town  meeting  for  the  term  of  one  year. 

Another  local  judicial  officer  was  the  Clerk  of  the  Writs. 
This  office  was  created  by  the  General  Court  in  1641. 
There  was  a  clerk  of  the  writs  in  each  town  nominated  for 
the  position  by  the  town  and  appointed  by  the  General 
Court.  A  petition  similar  in  form  to  that  sent  to  nominate 
the  commissioners  of  small  causes  was  used  in  presenting 
his  name  to  the  court :  "  It  is  the  desire  of  the  Towne  of 
Cambridge  that  the  Honored   Court  would   appoint   Mr. 

John to  be  clerk  of  the  Writs  there."  ^     After  1647 

this  official  was  appointed  by  the  court  of  the  shire  in  which 
he  lived. ^  His  term  of  office  was  one  year  and  it  was 
his  duty  to  grant  summons  and  attachments  in  all  civil 
actions  and  to  record  births  and  deaths.  His  fees  were 
prescribed: — for  every  warrant,  two  pencee,  for  a  replevin 
or  attachment  three  pence,  and  for  a  bond  four  pence. 

The  regular  English  jury  system  existed  in  Massa- 
chusetts,— ^the  jury  finding  the  facts  and  the  court  declar- 
ing the  law  or  directing  "  the  jury  to  find  according  to  the 
law."  *  A  law  of  the  colony,  passed  in  165 1,  provided  that 
jurymen  should  be  summoned  by  the  clerk  of  the  court, 
"  on  warrant  issued  to  the  Constables  of  the  several  towns 
of  the  jurisdiction  of  that  Court  proportionable  to  the  in- 

'^  Dorchester  Town  Records,  pp.  no,  115,  119. 

2  Mass.  Arch.,  vol.  B.  38,  pp.  18-19. 

3  Washburn's  Judicial  History  of  Mass.,  p.  40. 
*  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  2,  p.  21. 


52  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [52 

habitants  of  each  town."  Care  was  taken  that  the  duty  of 
serving  on  the  jury  should  not  be  divided  unequally  among 
the  towns.  When  complaint  was  made  that  the  towns 
were  unevenly  burdened  with  this  duty,  the  court  repeated 
the  order  just  mentioned,  stating  moreover  that  henceforth 
the  secretary  of  the  court  must  in  all  warrants  for  the  jury- 
men, *'  have  respect  unto  the  number  of  the  inhabitants  of 
each  town."  ^  After  receiving  the  warrant  the  constable 
notified  the  freemen  to  ''  choose  so  many  able  and  discreet 
men  as  the  warrant  required,  each  man  so  chosen  he  shall 
name  to  attend  the  Court  where  unto  they  are  appointed  and 
shall  make  return  of  the  warrant  to  the  clerk  aforesaid." 
Both  grand  and  petty  juries  were  chosen  in  this  way. 
Salem,  in  1643,  chose  eight  men  to  be  grand  jurymen  and 
the  same  year  the  selectmen  appointed  eight  men  to  act  on 
the  petty  jury.  The  grand  jury  was  chosen  for  one  year. 
The  number  chosen  from  each  town  can  not  be  ascertained, 
but  Salem  furnished  from  six  to  nine  men  for  the  grand 
jury  and  for  the  petty  jury  from  six  to  twelve.  The  last 
mentioned  jury  was  chosen  for  only  one  term  of  the  court. 

The  towns  furnished  jurymen  not  only  for  the  county 
court  but  also  for  the  Court  of  Assistants.  This  was  done 
in  a  manner  similar  to  the  one  already  described.  In  1673 
the  secretary  of  the  General  Court  sent  to  the  constables 
of  Watertown,  Dorchester,  Cambridge,  and  Charlestown 
warrants  requiring  them  to  assemble  the  freemen  of  their  re- 
spective towns  and  signify  to  them  that  they  were  required 
to  select  six  "  able  and  discreet  men  to  serve  for  the  Grand 
Jury  and  four  for  the  trial  jury  at  the  Court  of  the  Assist- 
ants .  .  .  and  make  return  thereof  to  the  secretary"  before  a 
given  date.^     It  was  one  of  the  duties  of  the  constables  to 

"^Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  175  and  vol.  2,  p.  285. 
^Mass.  Arch.  vol.  39,  p.  439. 


53]  TOIVN  COURTS  53 

see  that  the  men  thus  chosen  appeared  at  the  appointed  place 
on  the  day  mentioned  in  the  warrant.^  In  1667  the  constables 
were  "  required  to  warn  ye  Grand  jury  men  that  have  been 
impaneled  at  ye  court  of  assistants  now  sitting  in  Boston 
that  they  appear  ye  8th  of  this  Instant  at  8  of  ye  clock."  ^ 

Justice  was  administered  to  all  fairly  and  without  favor. 
Many  disputes  were  settled  out  of  court,  particularly  dis- 
putes over  land  or  highways.  This  was  usually  done 
through  the  appointment  of  commissioners  to  "  view  and 
determine  the  matter  in  difference  between  the  neighbours," 
or  by  the  parties  interested,  who  chose  arbitrators  by  whose 
decision  they  promise  to  abide.  ^ 

Disputes  between  inhabitants  of  different  towns  were  ad- 
justed either  by  arbitrators  chosen  by  the  towns  or  were 
tried  before  the  commissioner  of  small  causes.  For  instance, 
in  1653,  a  case  between  Watertown  and  an  inhabitant  of 
Sudbury  was  tried  before  the  commissioner  of  Watertown, 
the  selectmen  of  the  town  choosing  a  certain  man  to  prose- 
cute the  case  on  the  town's  behalf.* 

Punishments  were  not  unduly  severe,  fines  being  the 
usual  punishment  imposed  by  the  town.  Stocks  and  the 
whipping  post  were  in  use,  and  Salem,  in  1640,  recom- 
mended to  the  court  that  whipping  should  be  the  penalty 
imposed  for  not  paying  the  fines  of  twenty  shillings  for 
pulling  down  fences  without  the  owner's  consent.  Prisoners 
were  first  sent  to  the  Boston  jail,  but  gradually  the  towns 
built  their  own  houses  of  detention.  In  1645  Salem  began 
to  erect  a  "  house  of  correction,"  and  one  must  have  been 
built  in  Watertown  before  1656  for  in  that  year  a  rate  was 
raised  for  its  support.'' 

1  Mass.  Arch.  vol.  39,  p.  455-  "  ^bid.,  vol.  39»  PP-  557-562. 

3  Cambridge  Town  Records,  pp.   124-156-260. 

•*  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  32.  ^  Ibid.,  p.  47. 


or  THE 


UNIVERSITY. 

OF 


V  OF 


54  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [54 

Every  inhabitant  of  the  seventeenth  century  town  must 
have  been  fairly  well  versed  in  colonial  law,  judging  from 
the  number  of  law  books  purchased  by  each  town.  The 
constable  of  Watertown  in  1660  was  given  thirty-five  law 
books  to  "  sell  for  the  townes  use  at  two  shillings  six  pence 
per  booke;"  and  every  selectman  of  that  town,  as  well  as 
the  two  constables,  had  his  own  copy  "of  the  lawes  in  print" 
for  his  "  use  for  the  time  being  .  .  .  which  books  in  the  Cun- 
stables  hands  were  to  be  delivered  to  the  next  that  are 
Chosen  &  those  in  the  7  mens  hands  to  be  also  deliuered  to 
the  next  that  are  Chosen."  ^  By  1674  every  man  in 
Watertown  was  supposed  to  have  in  his  house  a  copy  of  the 
laws,  which  was  supplied  him  at  the  town's  expense.^  In 
1675  the  surplus  of  the  country  rate  was  used  to  buy  a 
law  book,  and  in  1679  the  selectmen  decided  to  procure 
two  hundred  copies  of  the  laws  "  respecting  ye  worke  of  ye 
tithingmen  "  and  give  them  to  "  ye  several  Inhabitants."  * 
Both  the  town  and  the  colony  insisted  that  the  children 
should  be  taught  some  of  the  laws  of  the  land.  In  1668  the 
General  Court  ordered  the  clerk  of  each  shire  court  "  to  ac- 
quaint the  selectmen  of  your  Towne  that  the  court  doth  ex- 
pect and  will  require  that "  the  selectmen  should  see  that 
all  children  know  the  capital  laws.*  The  selectmen,  in  their 
visitations  throughout  the  towns,  inquired  how  parents 
were  attending  to  this  phase  of  the  children's  education. 
The  selectmen  of  Watertown  in  1665  agreed  "  to  goe  throw 
the  towne  to  examin  how  children  are  taught  ....  the 
Capitall  laws."  ' 

1  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  95-  ^  ^^^^^  p.  121. 

«  Ibid.,  pp.  123-144.  *  Mass.  Arch.,  vol.  9,  p.  48.   ^ 

5  Watertown  Town  Records,  pp.  86-104. 


CHAPTER  III 
Town  Finances 

The  financial  system  of  a  Massachusetts  town  of  the 
seventeenth  century  was  pecuHar.  It  gave  to  the  citizens 
of  the  town  a  control  over  the  raising  and  expenditure  of 
revenue  much  more  complete  and  immediate  than  that  per- 
mitted by  the  systems  of  to-day.  In  fact,  during  the  early 
years  of  the  towns  there  was  no  regular  method  for  levying 
town  taxes,  nor  was  there  any  system  of  estimating  the 
amount  of  money  needed  for  the  yearly  expenses  of  the 
town,  or  for  expending  that  sum  for  town  expenses  in 
general.  On  the  contrary,  when  the  citizens  of  the  town 
realized  that  money  was  needed  for  its  running  expenses  or 
for  any  purpose  whatsoever,  they  assembled  in  the  town 
meeting,  discussed  the  need  for  money,  decided  whether  the 
need  should  be  met,  and  if  so,  how  much  money  would  be 
required,  and  ordered  the  amount  raised  for  that  specific 
purpose  and  expended  for  that  purpose  only.  Was  a  high- 
way to  be  made,  the  town  meeting  voted  that  a  certain  sum 
be  raised  to  pay  for  it ;  was  a  bridge  to  be  built,  the  meeting 
house  to  be  repaired,  or  the  schoolmaster's  salary  to  be  paid, 
the  same  thing  was  done.  Whatever  the  reason  for  the  tax, 
its  purpose  and  amount  were  specified.  Sometimes  this 
was  done  in  direct  obedience  to  a  town  ordinance,  some- 
times it  seems  to  have  been  required  only  by  custom.  For 
example,  Watertown,  in  1641,  ordered  "That  when  any 
Rate  is  made  by  ye  Towne  or  country  that  it  shall  be  speci- 
55]  55 


56  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [56 

fied  wherefore  it  is  made  and  what  the  sum  is."  ^  Dor- 
chester, Roxbury,  Salem  and  Cambridge,  while  following 
the  same  rule,  passed  no  order  directly  requiring  it.  Water- 
town,  "  at  a  public  towne  meeting  in  1647  ordered  that  the 
seven  men  should  make  a  rate  of  twenty  pounds  for  the 
bridge  over  the  river  at  the  mill,  and  for  such  debts  as 
were  due  and  to  relieve  the  poor."  ^  In  1666  it  ordered 
a  rate  of  i4o£  "  for  pastor  Sherman  for  this  year,"  ^  and 
"  granted  a  town  rate  of  74£  for  payment  of  towne  debts 
whereof  2of  was  to  release  such  poor  as  were  in  necessity 
and  for  the  finishing  of  Charles  Stearne's  house  so  far  as 
it  might."  Dorchester,  in  town  meeting  in  1633,  ordered  "a 
general  rate  through  out  the  Plantation  to  the  making  and 
maintaining  gates  and  fences  of  the  Plantation  and  bridges;* 
and  in  1637,  "  by  a  general  vote  of  all  the  Plantation  the 
town  agreed  that  one  hundred  pounds  should  be  levied  by 
a  rate  for  the  building  "  of  the  meeting  house. '^  It  is  not 
worth  while  to  multiply  these  examples;  they  are  to  be 
found  on  almost  every  page  of  the  town  records.^  Cam- 
bridge, in  1687,  voted  at  a  meeting  of  the  inhabitants  "  that 
the  selectmen  then  in  being  should  levy  a  rate  of  one  hun- 
dred and  two  pounds  ten  shillings  for  defraying  the  charge 
of  the  town  for  the  Ensuing  Yeare;"  ^  Roxbury,  in  1658, 
made  an  appropriation  "  for  the  repairing  of  the  Meeting 
House  and  the  sum  amounteth  to  the  capital  sum  of  61 
pounds  and  1 1  pence."  ® 

1  Water  town  Town  Records,  p.  7.  ^  Jhid.,  p.  12. 

8  Ihid.,  p.  88. 

*  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  4, 
« Ihid.,  p.  25. 

^Ihid.,  pp.  35,  41,  52,  57,  112  etc. 
"^  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  286. 

*  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  27. 


57]  TOWN  FINANCES  ^y 

As  time  passed,  however,  and  the  colonists  became  more 
inclined  to  entrust  the  ordinary  affairs  of  town  life  to  those 
chosen  to  manage  them,  it  became  customary  to  estimate 
more  or  less  roughly  the  money  which  the  town  would  re- 
quire for  the  year,  and  to  raise  this  under  the  name  of  the 
"town  rate."  This  was  still  a  very  indefinite  term;  it  sel- 
dom included  all  the  expenses  which  the  town  must  bear, 
and  it  did  not  entirely  do  away  with  the  former  custom  of 
raising  in  the  town  meeting  a  certain  sum  for  a  specific 
purpose. 

It  is  interesting  to  notice  how  the  different  towns  planned 
their  town  rates,  some  including  in  them  all  necessary  ex- 
penses for  the  year,  while  others  passed  them  for  definite 
purposes  and  then,  from  time  to  time,  ordered  other  rates  to  be 
made.  In  Cambridge,  as  a  rule,  every  item  of  expense  con- 
nected with  town  management  was  included  in  the  town 
rate,  very  few  special  rates  being  levied,  and  the  town  rates 
being  usually  large.  In  1686  the  town  rate  was  one  hun- 
dred pounds;  ^  in  1687,  102  pounds,  10  shilHngs;  and  earlier 
in  the  history  of  the  town  the  town  rate  equalled  the  coun- 
try rate,^  or  was  three  times  the  country  rate.^  This  rate 
was  levied  annually  and  usually  included  everything  but 
the  minister's  and  teacher's  salaries.  Watertown  and  Dor- 
chester levied  smaller  town  rates  and  frequently  voted 
special  rates  for  specific  purposes.  In  1680  the  Dorchester 
town  rate  was  only  23£,  12s,  lod,*  and,  in  1672,  2of,  8s,  7d;' 
Watertown,  in  1656,  voted  a  town  rate  of  only  42  pounds 
but  at  the  same  time  ordered  a  rate  of  22  pounds  "  for  the 
brig;  "  ^  and,  in  1661,  the  town  rate  was  only  60  pounds.'' 

1  Cambridge  Town  Records,  pp.  281,  286.  2  Jbid.,  p.  77. 

3  Ibid.,  p.  141.  *         *  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  245. 

^  Ibid.,  p.  174.  «  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  51. 

^  Ibid.,  p.  74. 


^8  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [58 

In  all  towns  the  tendency  was  to  do  away  with  special  rates 
and  to  make  the  town  rate  include  everything. 

In  making  the  town  rate,  the  statement  of  the  amount  of 
money  needed,  and  the  purposes  for  which  it  was  to  be 
expended  was  drawn  up  by  the  selectmen  and  presented  to 
the  town  meeting  for  confirmation.  The  following  illustra- 
tion from  the  Salem  Town  Records  will  show  the  usual 
items  included  in  such  a  rate: 

The  seuall  p'ticulars  for  a  towne  Rate  for  ye  year  ensuing- 

i  s  d 

ffor  Mr.  Whitney's  house 13  00  00 

ff or  Repayering  of  highways 17  10  00 

ffor  Elders  wood 20  00  00 

ffor  Mrs.   Sharpe 07  00  00 

ffor  Alice  Chichester's  sending  away 07  00  00 

ffor  the  Drumer 02  00  00 

ffor  the  mending  of  meeting  house 00  12  00 

ffor  the  bell  ringer 05  00  00 

Widow  dense 08  00  00 

80     12    00 

to  Daniel  Thomas 05    00    00 

To  the  Chardges  of  Deputys  voted 11    00    00 

To  be  paid  in  kind  and  price  according  to  rate  order  of  country. 

Although  the  seventeenth  century  town  never  wholly  re- 
signed its  control  over  the  local  finances,  and  although  the 
method  of  raising  and  appropriating  money  by  the  town 
meeting  was  never  given  up,  yet  the  selectmen  came  gradu- 
ally to  exercise  more  and  more  power  over  this  department 
of  the  city  government.  In  1645  Dorchester,  by  a  vote  of 
the  town,  gave  the  selectmen  "  power  to  charge  the  towne 
with  such  sum  or  sums  of  money  from  time  to  time  as  they 
shall  have  need  of  for  the  prudent  and  orderly  managing  of 
such  things  as  fall  out  in  their  times,  provided  that  one  Rate 
be  not  above  twenty  pounds  and  that  they  make  faithful  col- 
lection and  also  disbursement  thereof  to  be  recorded  before 


^9]  TOWN  FINANCES  59 

another  Rate  be  made."  ^  This  restriction  as  to  the  amount 
of  the  rate  which  they  could  raise  proved  so  burdensome  to 
the  selectmen  that  the  town  meeting  in  1667  allowed  them 
greater  liberty,  permitting  them  '*  to  make  such  rates  for  the 
townes  use  as  they  in  their  discresion  shall  think  fit."  ^ 
While  allowing  the  selectmen  this  discretion  in  making  the 
town  rate,  the  town  meeting  kept  to  itself  the  power  of  mak- 
ing the  minister's  rate; — in  1661,  it  made  a  rate  of  ioo£ 
for  Mr.  Mather  and,  in  1672,  "  80  pounds  for  the 
Minister."  ' 

Cambridge,  in  1652,  authorized  its  selectmen  to  raise 
money  for  the  town  expenses.  In  the  instructions  given 
the  selectmen  that  year  the  town  decreed,  "  That  the  neces- 
sary charges  for  the  maintenance  and  reparation  and  well 
ordering  of  all  such  things  wherein  the  Town  hath  a  com- 
mon interest  should  be  yearly  discharged  by  one  equall  rate, 
made  by  the  townsmen  and  levied  by  the  constable  on  the 
severall  Inhabitants."  *  This  power  the  selectmen  kept  dur- 
ing the  succeeding  years;  in  1661,  for  example,  ordering 
"  that  the  Constables  do  levy  a  rate  on  the  inhabitants,  each 
person  the  one  half  of  his  Country  Rates;"  ^  and  in  1662, 
"  that  the  charges  for  the  highwayes  &  causeway  be  de- 
frayed by  a  rate  on  the  Inhabitants  &  for  that  end  that  a 
rate  be  forth  with  levied  to  ye  quantity  of  three  Single 
Country  rates."  ® 

Even  before  they  were  directly  authorized  to  do  so,  the 
selectmen  often  made  the  town  rates.  In  Cambridge,  after 
1648, — the  date  of  the  first  record  of  raising  a  town  rate, 
— the  selectmen  did  this  occasionally.  "^     However,  as  has 

^Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  291.  ^ Ibid.,  p.  220. 

8  Ibid.,  p.  188.  *  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.   100. 

»  libd.,  p.  138.  «  Ibid.,  p.  141. 

T  Ibid.,  pp.  77,  281. 


6o  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [60 

been  said — the  town  meeting  never  resigned  completely  to 
the  selectmen  its  power  of  raising  the  town  rate,  even  after 
it  had  given  the  selectmen  that  power  it  frequntly  took  the 
matter  into  its  own  control  again/ 

Watertown  never  directly  conferred  this  power  upon  its 
selectmen.  They  sometimes  exercised  it,  but  generally  the 
town  meeting  ordered  the  rate  levied  and  stated  definitely 
its  use.  As  late  as  1650,  by  which  time  other  towns  were 
granting  this  privilege  to  the  selectmen,  the  town  meeting 
ordered  a  rate  of  30  pounds  "  for  the  poor  and  the  turrett 
&  for  the  payment  of  John  Shearmean,  and  Mr.  Browne  & 
the  following  of  Sudbury  business;"^  and,  in  1666,  a  rate 
of  74  pounds  "  for  payment  of  Town  debts ;  whereof  2of 
is  to  release  such  poor  as  are  in  necessity."  ^  In  Roxbury 
and  Salem  the  selectmen  often  made  the  town  rates,  but 
they  were  not  directly  authorized  to  do  so.  This  happened 
in  Roxbury  in  1659,  1643,  ^^^  '^  several  other  years.* 

Before  discussing  the  method  of  collecting  the  rate  after 
its  appropriation  by  the  town  meeting  or  the  selectmen,  it 
is  well  to  know  exactly  what  an  inhabitant  of  one  of  these 
towns  meant  when  he  voted  "  to  make  a  rate."  To  any 
New  England  man  of  that  century,  a  rate  meant  a  general 
property  tax  assessed  upon  the  entire  property  of  those 
liable  to  the  tax.  The  value  of  the  property  to  be  taxed  was 
determined  by  a  fixed  scale,  made  either  by  the  colony  or  by 
the  town.  Lists  of  the  taxable  property  owned  by  the  in- 
habitants were  made  and  the  property  of  every  inhabitant, 
whether  freemen  or  non-freemen,  was  levied  upon  according 
to  that  valuation.  Watertown,  in  1642,  ordered  "  That  all 
lands  granted  by  ye  town  "  should  be  rated  as  follows : 

1  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  235. 

2  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  22.  ^  Ibid.,  p.  88. 
*  Roxbury  Town  Records,  pp.  54,  55,  58. 


6i]  TOWN  FINANCES  6l 

£      s      d 

Land  broken  up  shall  pay  ye  Acre 2  10 

Land  inclosed  not  broken  up  ye  Acre 10 

The  further  Plaine  shall  pay  upon  ye  Acre 5 

The  dividents,  ye  remote  meddows  &  ye  hither  Plaine,..  10 

The  land  in  lieu  of  ye  Towne  Plott  ye  Acre i 

The  Farmes  shall  pay  upon  ye  Acre 6 

The  home  meddows  shall  pay  ye  Acre i  10 

Mares,  Steeres,  and  Cowes  are  rated  at 5 

Heifers,  2  years  old,  at 3 

Calves,  one  year  old,  at I  10 

Calves  under  a  year  at i 

Goats  at   10 

Sheep  at 2 

Hogs  a  year  old  at i 

Pigs    three    months    old    at 6      8 

Colts    at 2  17      6 

Lambs    at 5 

Kids    at 2      81 

In  1647  the  town  ordered  "  all  broken  up  land  shall  be 
rated  at  20  shillings  the  acre  provided  that  some  that  is  very 
bad  shall  go  at  15  shillings,  unbroken  land  at  10  shillings, 
all  medow  at  20  shillings."  ^  But  a  few  years  later  the 
town  agreed  to  abide  by  the  law  of  the  colony,  and  in  1663 
and  1664  ordered  "  that  the  Law  of  the  General  Court  for 
the  Assessment  of  estates  to  pay  the  rates  for  publique 
Charges  shall  be  the  rule  to  assesse  the  estates  of  the  in- 
habitants for  all  town  rates;  poll  money  excepted."  *  This 
law,  passed  by  the  General  Court  in  1664,  made  a  uniform 
valuation  for  "  all  public  rates  till  this  court  take  further 
order  therein  all  sorts  of  cattle  shalbe  valued  as  hereafter  ex- 
prest  " — (the  list  being  given,) — "  houses,  lands  of  all  sorts, 
marchantable  goods,  mills,  ships,  lesser  vessels  &  boats  .  .  to 
be  valued  in  ye  several  towns  according  to  their  worth  in  ye 
said  place  where  they  are."  *       At  other  times  the  value 

1  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  8.  2  ihid.,  p.  14. 

s  Ihid.,  pp.  80,  84.  *  Mass.  Col.  Rec.  vol.  2,  p.  174. 


62  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [62 

placed  upon  different  kinds  of  property  by  the  commission- 
ers for  the  county,  meeting  in  the  shire  town,  was  accepted 
as  the  basis  of  taxation  in  the  town.  In  1668  this  was 
declared  to  be  "  los  per  acre  for  all  arable  and  meadow 
land  and  5s  for  pasture/'  ^ 

The  rate  was  levied  upon  everyone, — non-freemen  as  well 
as  freemen, — with  the  occasional  exception  of  magistrates, 
ministers,  and  those  excused  for  special  reasons.  It  was 
enforced  by  both  colony  law  and  town  ordinance.  Water- 
town,  in  1636,  made  the  order  that  "  all  charges  arising 
either  for  the  country's  service  or  for  the  Towne  service 
should  be  levied  both  of  Freemen  and  foreigners;"  ^  and,  in 
1638,  the  General  Court  itself  ordered  that  every  inhabitant 
of  a  town  should  contribute  to  town  charges.^ 

It  was  but  seldom  that  anyone  was  excused  from  paying 
the  rate,  but  such  exemptions  are  found.  Dorchester,  in 
1684,  abated  "  two-thirds  of  the  rate  "  of  a  certain  man  to 
the  ministry,  "  and  because  of  his  remote  living  from  the 
meeting  "  freed  a  certain  Harry  White  "  from  paying  to  the 
ministry  by  way  of  Rate  for  the  yeare  insuing  and  until  the 
town  see  cause  to  alter  it."  In  1681  this  town  freed  one 
John  Browne  from  all  "  Town  Rates  Excepting  only  such 
Rates  as  shall  be  made  for  the  ministry,  provided  the  town 
be  at  no  charges  toward  the  maintenances  of  his  father  or 
mother  except  it  be  in  case  of  sickness  or  any  extraordinary 
emergency;  but  in  the  case  the  constable  do  Require  of  him 
his  country  Rates  he  shall  then  be  allowed  the  same  out  of 
the  town  Rates."  * 

Cambridge,  in  1649,  granted  the  request  of  a  citizen  of 

^Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  159. 

2  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  3. 

'  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  4,  pt.  i,  p.  247. 

*  Dorchester  Town  Records,  pp.  270,  275,  260. 


63]  TOWN  FINANCES  63 

the  town  "  to  remit  the  present  town-rate  on  account  of 
God's  vissitation  by  sickness  on  himself  and  family."  ^  Min- 
isters were  occasionally  excused  from  paying.  Dorchester, 
in  1667,  voted  that  her  ministers,  Mr.  Mather  and  Mr. 
Stoughton,  be  freed  from  the  town  and  country  rate  for 
that  year,^  and  Watertown  allowed  its  constables  immun- 
ity from  certain  rates  until  1652,  when  it  decided  to  have 
them  "  pay  ther  proportion  to  all  rates,"  and,  instead  of 
granting  them  this  immunity,  to  pay  them  a  fixed  salary  for 
gathering  the  town  rates  and  fines.  ^ 

In  order  to  secure  a  basis  for  making  the  rate,  invoices  of 
the  amount  of  property  owned  by  each  man  and  the  value 
of  it  were  taken  frequently.  In  some  towns  this  was  done 
according  to  a  method  prescribed  by  the  General  Court  of 
1646, — namely,  that  the  freemen  of  every  town  should 
choose  one  of  their  number  who,  with  the  selectmen,  should 
take  "  ye  just  number  of  their  males,  and  also  make  a  true 
valuation  of  all  things  rateable."  *  Watertown,  in  obedi- 
ence to  this  order  was  accustomed  to  choose  by  vote 
at  its  town-meeting  a  commissioner  who,  together  with 
the  selectmen  drew  up  the  list  of  taxable  property. 
This  was  done  very  frequently  in  that  town,  as  it  is 
mentioned  in  1649,  1655,  1656,  1661."''  The  town  used  the 
same  invoice  for  the  country,  county,  town  and  ministry 
rates. ^  To  insure  perfect  justice  in  apportioning  the  rate, 
Watertown,  in  1647,  agreed  upon  the  following  plan  for 
taking  and  keeping  this  invoice,  owing  to  complaints  be- 

1  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  85. 

^Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  145. 

8  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  30. 

*  Mass.  Col  Rec,  vol.  2,  p.  174. 

5  Watertown  Town  Records,  pp.  18,  42,  47,  72. 

«  Ihid.,  pp.   10,   18,  47. 


64  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [64 

ing  made,  "  that  wrong  had  been  done  to  men  in  rating, 
some  through  mistake  in  the  invoice,  some  in  the  draught 
of  the  rate,  and  may  be  to  all  as  may  happen  when  accounts 
are  not  truly  given  and  kept;  for  the  prevention  whereof, 
and  that  all  men  whom  it  concerns  may  have  just  satisfac- 
tion, and  the  town's  money  laid  out  to  the  end  the  town  ap- 
points :  it  is  ordered  the  invoice  shall  from  time  to  time  be 
taken,  in  two  or  three  sheets  of  paper  fixed  together,  and 
drawn  into  squares ;  and  that  in  the  margin  on  the  left  hand 
the  names  of  the  persons  concerned  in  the  rate  should  be 
put  in  alphabetical  order,  and  in  the  uppermost  margin  the 
particulars  to  be  rated,  with  their  values,  and  underneath 
right  against  every  man's  name  the  particular  sum  he  hath 
of  every  kind ;  and  against  that  the  total  sum  of  every  man's 
estate;  and  after  that  the  sum  of  every  man's  rate."  ^  This 
list  was  to  be  kept  in  some  house  convenient  to  all  where 
men  could  easily  consult  it.  At  the  same  time,  it  was  or- 
dered that  two  men  should  be  chosen  to  take  account  of  all 
rates  made  and  gathered  and  to  enter  them  in  a  "  book  of 
white  paper  "  specifying  the  sum  of  every  rate  and  ''  the 
particulars  how  it  was  disposed  that  so  every  rate  may  go  to 
the  end  the  town  intended."  These  two  men,  so  chosen,  had 
power  to  call  to  account  all  men  to  whom  the  town  had  de- 
livered any  rate,  or  any  other  who  might  in  any  way  be 
possessed  of  any  of  the  town's  stock.  It  was  also  ordered 
that  all  rates  should  be  made  with  as  little  surplusage  as 
possible,  and  that  what  was  over  should  be  added  to  the  next 
rate.^  Roxbury,  at  times,  followed  a  slightly  different  plan 
in  making  its  invoice.  It  required  all  its  inhabitants  upon  due 
notice  to  bring  to  the  selectmen,  in  August  of  every  year,  "a 
list  of  their  estates  rateable  to  the  country,  to  the  town,  and 
to  the  church,"  from  which  lists  the  selectmen  were  required 

1  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  13.  ^  Ibid. 


65]  TOWN  FINANCES  65 

to  make  "  all  their  rates  for  that  year."  ^  Failure  to  bring 
this  note  was  punished  by  a  fine  of  five  shillings.^  At  other 
times,  however,  the  town  followed  the  usual  custom  of 
choosing  a  commissioner  who,  together  with  the  selectmen, 
made  "  a  list  of  the  real  and  personal  estate  of  each  in- 
habitant" ' 

Dorchester  also  drew  up  its  list  of  taxable  property  in 
a  way  different  from  that  prescribed  by  the  General  Court. 
It  elected  in  town  meeting  a  number  of  men  called  "  Rat- 
ers "  or  commissioners,  at  first  whenever  a  rate  was  made, 
but  later  annually.'^  It  was  their  duty  to  make  the  list  of 
the  rateable  estates  of  the  town.  There  was,  however,  no 
prescribed  method  for  them  to  follow  prior  to  1658.  Then 
the  town  agreed,  "  that  all  persons  should  give  in  a  true 
and  perfect  account  of  all  their  ratable  estates  to  the  Raters 
by  the  thirtieth  day  of  this  present  month  and  so  by  every 
thirtieth  day  of  the  tenth  month  from  time  to  time,  and  also 
to  bring  in  a  true  and  perfect  account  of  their  ratable  es- 
tate unto  the  selectmen  by  the  thirtieth 'day  of  the  fifth  month 
next  and  so  by  the  thirtieth  day  of  the  fifth  month  from 
time  to  time  upon  the  penalty  of  five  shillings  for  their 
neglect  of  each,  and  also  to  abide  the  will  and  doom  of  the 
selectmen  and  raters  of  them,  the  fine  or  penalty  to  be  put 
into,  or  added  unto  the  town  rate."  ^ 

It  is  impossible  to  decide  how  Cambridge  made  up  its  list 
of  taxable  property,  as  very  few  records  of  its  financial  af- 
fairs remain.  However,  since  there  is  no  record  of  any  de- 
viation from  the  method  prescribed  by  the  General  Court, 
it  is  probable  that  Cambridge  followed  that  entirely.  The 
same  is  true  of  Salem.     Here  the  only  variation  is  found 

^  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  65.  ^  Ibid.,  p.  45. 

^  Ibid.,  pp.  142,  212. 

*  Dorchester  Town  Records,  pp.  52,  69,  73,  83,  etc.     « Ibid.,  p.  93. 


66  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [66 

in  the  number  of  men  chosen  to  make  the  Hst,  some  times 
as  many  as  eighteen  being  chosen. 

Some  idea  of  the  value  of  the  property  of  the  seventeenth 
century  town  may  be  gained  from  the  invoices  of  Water- 
town  which  were  sent  by  their  commissioners  to  the  shire 
town.  In  1647  h^i*  commissioners  reported  that  their  last 
invoice  was  5407£,  04s,  o6d/  and,  in  1658,  7298£.^ 

The  commissioners  were  paid.  Watertown  gave  hers 
ten  shillings  or  occasionally  one  pound.  ^  They  were  elected 
by  the  freemen  only,  a  discrimination  which  seemed  very 
unfair  to  the  other  inhabitants;  so  much  *  so  that,  in  1659, 
the  non-freemen  of  Roxbury  chose  a  certain  Edward  Deni- 
son  "  to  see  at  the  next  General  Court  whether  the  non- 
freemen  might  not  have  a  vote  to  choose  commissioners."  ^ 

During  the  earlier  years  of  the  town,  it  was  compara- 
tively easy  to  make  the  lists  of  the  taxable  property  of  every 
inhabitant,  as  every  one's  possessions  were  either  in  land  or 
animals.  But  as  the  towns  grew,  many  workmen  came  into 
them  who  owned  no  taxable  property  while  other  men  be- 
gan to  make  incomes  from  different  trades  which  were  not 
taxed.  It  therefore  became  apparent  to  the  colony  and  to 
the  towns  that  the  owners  of  real  estate  were  paying  more 
than  their  share  for  the  support  of  the  government.  Laws 
were  passed  to  correct  this.  The  colony  in  1646  began  to 
tax  the  income  of  laborers  as  well  as  the  estates  of  other  men. 
By  a  law  passed  that  year,  laborers  who  received  eighteen 
pence  per  day  in  the  summer  time  were  compelled  to  pay  three 
shillings  four  pence  annually  in  excess  of  their  poll  tax,' 

1  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  15.  '  Ibid.,  p.  56 

*  Ibid.,  p.  14. 

*  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  256. 
6  Mass.  Col.  Rec.  vol.  2,  p.  173. 

«  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  28. 


67]  TOWN  FINANCES  67 

and  "  all  such  persons  as,  by  advantage  of  their  arts  and 
trade,  were  more  able  to  help  bear  the  public  charge,  ye 
common  laborers,  workmen,  as  butchers,  bakers,  brewers, 
smiths,  carpenters,  tailors,"  should  pay  in  proportion  to 
their  incomes.^  Of  the  five  towns  here  discussed.  Water- 
town  seems  to  have  been  most  insistent  upon  this  point.  In 
1653  ^^  ordered  "that  all  single  persons  that  live  at  their 
own  hands  and  have  not  I5£  visible  estate  shall  be  rated 
to  the  ministry  and  town  charges  at  I5£  estate,"  and  "that 
all  persons  that  have  I5£  estate  and  yet  have  advantage  by 
following  trades  or  other  labor  and  are  not  disabled  by  sick- 
ness or  otherwise,  shall  be  rated  at  i^£  estate."  ^  At  the 
same  time,  it  rated  the  mill  of  the  town  at  a  "  hundred 
and  forty  pounds."  ^  Again,  in  1664,  the  selectmen  or- 
dered that  several  of  the  inhabitants  who  were  making  a 
fair  income  by  trade  should  pay  their  due  proportion  toward 
the  town's  expenses.*  This  was  done,  but  it  caused  such 
great  complaint  from  those  affected  by  it,*^  that  the  selectmen, 
not  being  able  "  with  satisfaction  to  all  the  seven  men  .  .  to 
rate  men  for  their  trades,"  left  the  whole  matter  to  the 
town,®  and  the  town  thereupon  "  declared  by  vote  that  it 
expected  that  men  should  be  rated  for  their  trades  (in  towne 
rates)  according  to  the  order  of  the  General  Court."  The 
selectmen  were  required  to  put  this  order  into  execution.^ 

It  has  been  shown  that  either  the  town  meeting  or  the 
selectmen  decided  the  amount  and  purpose  of  the  rate,  and 
that  this  rate  was  based  upon  an  invoice  of  the  taxable 
property  of  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  town  estimated  in 
terms  of  a  fixed  scale  of  values.     The  next  step  in  raising 

1  Mass.  Col.  Rec.  vol.  2,  p.  213. 

2  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  33.  ^  /^,"rf 

*  Ibid.,  p.  84.  '  ^  Ibid.,  p.  89. 

*  Ibid.,  p.  91.  ^  Ibid.,  p.  92. 


68  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [68 

the  rate  was  to  proportion  to  each  man  his  due  share  and 
then  to  gather  it.  This  was  left  to  the  selectmen.  In  some 
instances  they  themselves  made  the  rate  and  gave  the  one 
for  the  town  to  the  constable  to  collect/  and  that  for  the 
minister  to  the  deacons ;  ^  while  in  other  cases  they  appointed 
different  men  to  make  the  rate  ^  and  entrusted  it  to  the  con- 
stables to  be  gathered.  In  still  other  instances  also  they 
issued  warrants  to  the  "  raters  to  make  the  rate,  and  or- 
dered the  bailiff  to  gather  it."  *  The  minister's  rate  was 
often  made  by  the  deacons,  as  well  as  by  the  town  raters. 
"  It  is  voted  the  said  28  day  of  the  Qmo  that  our  Teacher 
Mr.  Mather  shall  have  a  hundred  pounds  for  this  year  and 
that  the  deacons  shall  join  with  the  rates  now  chosen  to  pro- 
portion every  man  according  to  the  rule  of  proportion."  ^ 
In  some  cases  the  constables  had  even  greater  powers  over 
the  rate.  In  Cambridge,  in  1647,  they  both  made  and 
gathered  the  rate;®  in  Dorchester,  in  1666,  they  not  only 
gathered  the  rate  but  also  expended  it  for  town  purposes. 
In  Cambridge,  it  was  customary  to  divide  the  rate,  giving 
to  one  constable  the  collection  of  the  town  rate  and  to  the 
other  the  collection  of  the  country  and  county  rate.  This 
was  also  true  in  Roxbury.^  From  instances  given  in  the 
records  of  Watertown  and  Dorchester  the  method  of  mak- 
ing and  collecting  the  rate  in  those  towns  can  be  seen.  "  The 
Rates  for  the  Ministry,  and  for  the  towne  were  returned 

1  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  30. 

^  Ibid.,  p.  113  and  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  138. 

8  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  31. 

*  Dorchester  Town  Records,  pp.  63,  137,  162.  "  That  same  day  there 
was  a  warrant  delivered  for  the  Raters  lo  make  a  Rate  for  the 
ministry  of  i30-o-o£  and  a  Towne  Rate  of  45-0-oi." 

^  Ibid.,  p.  63. 

•  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  63. 
'  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  104. 


69]  TOWN  FINANCES  69 

and  brought  in  to  the  select-men  by  the  Raters,  John  Capen, 
Richard  Hall,  and  Willi  Pond,  signed  by  thier  hands 

£      s     d 

The  Rate  for  the  Ministry 130    00    05 

The  Rate  for  the  Towne  &  schoole 057    05    63 

Also  the  same  day  was  granted  to  the  Constables  a  Warrant 
for  the  gathering  of  the  Towne  Rate."  ^  In  Watertown, 
in  1647,  "At  a  meeting  of  the  seven  men  at  Mr.  Wheetnys 
the  list  of  all  the  estates  being  taken  in  by  the  seauen  men 
and  the  Comissionier :  (before  chosen)  the  town  chose  John 
Sherman  to  Draw  up  a  Rate  for  ye  constable  to  gather  by, 
and  also  to  send  a  list  to  the  Treasurer  of  the  just  sum  of 
the  whole  estates  of  the  Town."  ^ 

The  constables  not  only  gathered  the  rate  but  also  ex- 
pended it  according  to  instructions  given  them  either  by  the 
town  or  the  selectmen.  They  were  compelled  to  keep  a 
strict  account  of  money  received  and  expended,  rendering 
"  the  account  of  their  constableship  both  of  the  country  rate 
or  whatever  they  gathered  "  to  the  selectmen,  who  were  re- 
sponsible to  the  town.  For  example,  on  the  17th  day  of 
September  1657,  Henry  Woodward  and  Richard  Hall,  the 
constables  of  Dorchester,  came  to  the  selectmen  and  gave  an 
account  of  all  the  money  they  had  gathered  in,  in  the  years 
1656  and  1657.^  Dorchester,  however,  restricted  the  power 
of  the  constables  after  1672.  In  the  tenth  month  of  that 
year  the  town  voted  to  elect  annually  a  treasurer,  whose 
work  or  office  should  be  to  take  all  accounts  from  the  con- 
stables for  rates  or  fines  or  any  other  accounts  which  might 
belong  to  the  town,  and  to  make  disbursements  for  the 

^Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  130. 
2  Watertown  Town  Record,  p.  10. 
8  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  229. 


JO  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [70 

town's  use,  and  in  case  of  non-payment  by  any,  to  issue 
warrants  to  the  constables  to  distrain.  This  treasurer  was 
compelled  to  give  an  account  to  the  selectmen  at  the  end 
of  the  year,  or  at  any  other  time  that  the  selectmen  might 
require  it,  and  by  them  was  discharged/  Cambridge  com- 
pelled its  constables  "  to  give  in  a  yearly  account  of  what 
they  received  of  the  public  stock  of  the  town  by  rate  or 
otherwise,  and  how  they  had  disbursed  the  same,  annually 
before  the  yearly  election  of  the  townesmen."  This  account 
was  kept  upon  record  in  a  book  "  fairly  written."  In  case 
the  constables  failed  to  account  for  all  the  money,  they  were 
continued  in  their  office  another  year,  "unless  the  town  saw 
meet  otherwise  to  dispose."  ^  Watertown  voted  in  1669, 
that  "  henceforth  all  constables,  before  they  go  off  their 
office  shall  give  their  accounts  of  all  rates  they  have  under 
their  hand;"^  and  in  1666  the  town  amended  this  order 
so  that  all  accounts  must  be  closed  by  September  i ,  "  upon 
penalty  of  twenty  shillings  a  month."  *  This  was  also 
the  rule  in  Roxbury.  There  the  selectmen  went  over 
the  constables'  accounts  and,  if  they  found  them  cor- 
rect, gave  the  constables  a  discharge.^  If  the  constables 
refused  to  give  an  account  of  the  town  rate,  as  happened  in 
Roxbury  in  1690,  the  case  between  the  town  and  the  con- 
stables was  taken  to  the  General  Court,  which  compelled  the 
constables  to  settle  their  accounts.^  If  they  did  not  bring 
in  their  accounts  by  the  appointed  day,  they  were  fined : — 
"  Wheras  there  was  an  order  given  to  Thomas  Tolman  and 
Enoch  Wiswall,  constables  for  the  year   1661,  that  they 

^Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  187. 

2  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  100. 

«  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  65.  *  Ibid.,  p.  89. 

'^  Roxbury  Town  Records,  pp.   17,  22,  89. 

«  Mass.  Arch.,  vol.  36,  p.  381. 


71]  TOWN  FINANCES  71 

should  bring  in  their  accounts  of  the  rates  they  received 
unto  the  selectmen  the  9(7)  62:  Thomas  Tolman  came 
unto  the  select  men  the  10(9)  62:  and  by  reason  Enoch 
Wiswall  did  not  appear,  therefore  there  could  no  account 
be  given,  therefore  the  selectmen  doth  lay  the  penalty  of 
13s,  46.  upon  Enoch  Wiswall  for  his  neglect."  ^  The 
selectmen,  after  receiving  the  report  of  the  constables, 
reported  to  the  town  how  the  money  had  been  expended. 
At  the  general  town  meeting  of  Dorchester,  in  1670,  "  after 
the  directory  was  read,  the  accounts  of  the  rats  was  deliv- 
ered to  the  towne."  ^ 

The  constables  were  paid  officials.  Salem,  as  early  as 
1635,  paid  her  constable  twenty  shillings  for  "  his  pains 
in  gathering  such  of  the  town  rates  as  is  committed  to  him;" 
but  this  seems  to  have  been  unusual  so  early  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  town.  It  is  probable  that  they  were  at  first 
paid  by  being  allowed  exemption  from  certain  rates  and 
that  the  custom  of  direct  payment  began  later  in  the  cen- 
tury. Dorchester  began  the  custom  of  paying  its  constable 
in  1652,  Cambridge  did  the  same  in  1676  "  the  select  men 
taking  into  consideration  the  inequality  of  abating  the  Con- 
stables their  particular  towne  rate  for  their  service  in  that 
office,  since  it  often  happens  that  they  that  do  the  greatest 
part  of  the  service  have  the  least  rates,  the  selectmen  do 
therefor  agree  to  allow  our  four  Constables  this  year  for 
their  service  fifty  shillings  out  of  the  town  rate  and  the  two 
constables  in  the  town  to  have  two  thirds  of  it  and  the  other 
two  constables  to  have  one  third  of  it  between  them."  ^ 

All  rates  not  promptly  paid  could  be  collected  by  distraint. 
This  was  done  by  the  constable,  acting  under  the  authority 
of  a  warrant  from  the  selectmen  or  the  town  treasurer.     In 

^Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  iii.  -Ibid.,  p.  170. 

8  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  229. 


J2  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [72 

the  early  years  of  Dorchester  the  bailiff  also  had  this  power 
over  the  minister's  rates.  In  1653  the  selectmen  required 
the  bailiff  "  to  ask  and  receive  of  the  several  persons  pre- 
sented to  you  such  sum  or  sums  as  you  shall  find  them 
charged  v^ith  all  and  upon  their  default  of  payment  upon 
demand,  these  presents  shall  enable  you  to  distrain  and 
make  sale  according  unto  order  of  court."  ^  But,  in  1657, 
the  constable  helped  the  bailiff  of  the  previous  year  to  gather 
the  sums  not  paid  him,  and  after  that  the  bailiff  appears  no 
more  in  that  connection. 

Rates  were  paid  partly  in  money  and  partly  in  kind, — 
oats,  rye,  wheat,  pease,  and  even  horses  and  cattle  being 
taken  in  payment.  Cattle,  when  taken  as  part  of  the  coun- 
try rate,  were  valued  by  two  indifferent  men.^  In  making 
a  rate  the  proportion  to  be  paid  in  kind  and  the  value  of  the 
articles  to  be  received  in  payment  were  usually  specified. 

Dorchester,  in  1674,  paid  a  certain  Nicholas  George  for 
services  rendered  the  town  2£,  12s,  in  money;  "the  other 
20s  he  had  in  malt."  At  the  same  time  it  paid  another  man 
"  2£  and  20s  he  had  in  clapboards."  ^ 

Dorchester,  in  voting  Mr.  Flint  eighty  pounds,  "  for  his 
labour  in  the  ministry  "  for  the  year  1671,  ordered  "  one- 
fourth  part  to  be  in  money  "  and  the  remainder  in  kind,* 
valuing  Indian  corn  at  three  shillings  a  bushel,  pease  at 
three  shillings  six  pence,  rye  at  four  shillings  and  wheat  at 
five  shillings,  and,  in  1677,  in  making  a  rate  of  two  hun- 
dred pounds  for  carrying  on  the  work  of  the  meeting  house, 
the  town  ordered  "  that  one-third  should  be  paid  in  money 

'^Dorchester  Town  Records,  pp.  63,  64,  69,  131. 

^  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  3,  p.  27. 

8  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  202. 

*  Ibid.,  p.  188. 


73]  TOWN  FINANCES  73 

and  the  other  two-thirds  in  current  country  pay."  ^  Water- 
town,  in  gathering  the  town  rate  for  1648,  agreed  that 
"  Indian  Corne  should  be  redeemed  at  three  shillings  per 
bushel,  rye  at  four  shillings,  and  pease  at  four  shillings; 
wheat  and  barly  at  five  shillings  a  bushel."  "  Roxbury,  in 
raising  its  town  rate  for  1667,  ordered  that  "  corn  amongst 
ourselves  who  are  inhabitants  of  Roxbury  shall  pass  cur- 
rent as  follows :  Indian  corn,  three  shillings  per  bushel, 
pease,  at  three  shillings  eight  pence,  barley  and  malt  at  four 
shillings,  six  pence,  rye  four  shillings."  ^  The  value  of  the 
grains  received  in  payment  varied  almost  every  year.  The 
following  year,  1668,  Roxbury  valued  barley  and  malt  at 
only  four  shillings  but  left  the  other  grains  at  the  same 
valuation.'*  Frequently,  the  town  simply  specified  that  the 
price  of  corn,  for  the  payment  of  the  town  rate,  should  be  the 
same  as  that  received  for  the  country  rate  for  the  corres- 
ponding year,^  though  the  value  placed  upon  grain  by  the 
town  was  not  always  the  same  as  that  placed  upon  it  by  the 
colony. 

In  paying  the  town  debts,  the  same  plan  of  using  partly 
money  and  partly  produce  was  followed.  In  1655  the 
selectmen  of  Dorchester  agreed  to  pay  the  school  teacher 
twenty-five  pounds  for  that  year,  "  two-thirds  in  wheat, 
pease  or  barley,  and  one-third  in  Indian  corn,"  valued  "  at 
the  price  which  the  General  Court  should  from  time  to 
time  appoint."  ®  Watertown,  in  165 1,  paid  the  cow  keeper 
twenty-five  pounds,  "  one  half  in  English  corn,  and  the 
other  half  in  Indian  corn — the  English  corn  when  the  cattle 
are  delivered  home  and  the  Indian  at  the  last  of  Novem- 

^  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  220. 

2  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  16. 

3  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  65.  *  Ibid.,  p.  69. 
^Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.   168. 

*  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  7. 


74  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [74 

ber."  ^  In  1668  three  bushels  of  corn  were  received  by  Dor- 
chester "  for  rent  for  the  remote  meadows,"  and  were  paid 
"  into  the  hands  of  John  Minot  towards  the  work  done 
about  the  school  house."  ^ 

This  method  of  payment  sometimes  occasioned  loss  to 
those  receiving  the  grain  through  the  decline  in  its  value. 
In  1660  Dorchester  ordered  the  constable  to  pay  Thomas 
VViswall,  the  school  teacher,  "  eighteen  shillings  and  six 
pence  in  satisfaction  for  losses  he  sustained  by  reason  of  the 
loss  of  the  price  of  Indian  corne  which  he  receive  for  that 
which  was  due  him." 

I  We  have  hitherto  discussed  the  financial  affairs  of  the 
town  only  in  so  far  as  raising  money  for  town  purposes 
was  concerned.  Our  discussion  will  not  be  complete  with- 
out an  account  of  the  way  in  which  the  town  contributed 
through  its  county  and  country  rate  to  the  support  of  the 
colony, — a  matter  as  vital  to  the  town  as  was  the  support 
of  the  town  itself. 

In  the  Massachusetts  colony,  the  town  was  the  unit  for 
levying  both  country  and  county  taxes.  From  the  earliest 
days  of  the  colony,  the  Court  of  Assistants,  and  then  the 
General  Court,  looked  to  the  towns  to  raise  the  money  needed 
for  colonial  expenses.  The  original  way  of  raising  this 
revenue  was  to  determine  the  amount  needed  and  then  to 
assign  quotas  to  the  different  towns,  allowing  each  of  these 
the  liberty  of  raising  the  required  amount  in  any  way  it 
chose.  September  25th,  1634,  the  court  ordered  six  hun- 
dred pounds  "  levyed  out  of  the  several  plantations  for  pub- 
lic uses,  the  one  half  to  be  levied  forthwith  and  the  other 

w/  half  before  the  next  General  Court."  Of  this  sum  Dorchester 
was  to  pay  eighty  pounds,  Roxbury  seventy  pounds,  New 

1  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  23. 
^Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  154. 


75]  TOWN  FINANCES  75 

Towne  eighty  pounds,  and  Salem  forty-five  pounds.*  In 
1635  the  court  ordered  two  hundred  pounds  to  be  levied, 
of  v^hich  2y£,  62,  8d  was  assessed  upon  Dorchester,  the 
same  amount  upon  Boston  and  Cambridge,  2o£  upon  Rox- 
bury  and  Watertown,  and  i6£  upon  Salem.^  In  assign- 
ing these  quotas  the  court  endeavored  to  be  fair,  inquiring 
frequently  what  the  town  rates  were  and  using  these  to 
determine  the  wealth  of  the  town.  In  1634  it  ordered 
every  constable  to  give  to  the  deputies  to  the  General  Court 
a  copy  of  the  town  rates,  "  to  be  considered  of  by  them  " 
for  the  purpose  of  judging  if  any  were  overrated  and  to 
equalize  the  rate  for  the  future.^  In  assigning  the  quotas 
for  1636  it  appointed  a  committee  of  thirteen,  "  to  require 
the  last  rates  of  each  town  in  the  plantation,"  and  to  find 
out  ''  thereby,  and  by  all  other  means  they  can  according  to 
the  best  of  their  discretion,  the  true  value  of  every  town  and 
so  to  make  an  equal  rate  for  the  one  hundred  pounds  now 
granted  to  be  levyed."  * 

Massachusetts,  in  1646,  abandoned  the  quota  system. 
Henceforth  the  colony  tax  was  fixed  at  a  penny  in  the 
pound  "  on  all  visible  estates  in  the  colony,"  and  was  col- 
lected by  the  colony  treasurer,  who  sent  to  the  selectmen  of 
each  town  a  warrant  for  the  rate  due  from  that  town,  which 
rate  was  based  upon  the  latest  inventory  of  the  ratable  es- 
states  of  the  town.  After  1647  the  treasurer  of  the  colony 
sent  "  in  ye  fifth  month  a  warrant  to  the  constables  to  call 
together  the  inhabitants  of  the  towne,"  to  choose  a  com- 
missioner who,  with  the  selectmen,  made  a  list  of  the  males 
between  sixteen  and  sixty  years  old  for  the  poll  tax,  and 
also  a  valuation  of  the  property  of  the  town  both  real  and 
personal.      On    the    fourth    of   the   seventh   month    these 

1  Mass.  Col  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  129.  2  /^;j^  vol.  i,  p.  149. 

3  Ibid.,  vol.  I,  p.  138.  *  Ihid.,  vol.  i,  pp.  175,  180. 


76  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [76 

commissioners  met  at  the  shire  town,  and  there  corrected 
the  lists  each  one  brought  with  him.  When  this  was  com- 
pleted the  treasurer  sent  a  warrant  to  each  town  to  gather 
the  rate  based  upon  the  lists  brought  from  that  town.^ 
Sometimes,  however,  the  list  '*  of  the  just  sum  of  the  whole 
estate  of  the  Towne  "  was  sent  direct  to  the  province  treas- 
urer.^ An  idea  of  the  report  made  at  the  shire  town  may- 
be gained  by  noticing  the  report  handed  in  by  Watertown  in 
1664, 

"  Return  to  the  shire  town  according  to  court  order  as  f olloweth : 

i        s 

The  value  of  housing,  land  &  cattel  Amounteth  unto 7572     18 

The  numbers  of  heads 0154 

Tradesmen  with  their  trades  and  income  thereby 0347 

trades  with  this  proviso  that  the  County  Did  the  like  with  all  trades- 
men." 8 

The  amount  of  the  rate  due  the  colony  from  the  town 
was  proportioned  among  the  inhabitants  of  the  town  by  the 
selectmen  and  the  commissioner  and  was  then  given  by  the 
selectmen  into  the  hands  of  the  constable  to  be  collected 
and  to  be  paid  to  the  treasurer  of  the  colony.  For  example, 
"  Dorchester  in  1657  made  the  rate  for  the  use  of  the  coun- 
try by  the  selectmen  and  the  Commissioner  chosen  for  that 
end  24£  6s."  *  And  in  Roxbury  in  1698,  "  by  virtue  of 
a  warrant  from  the  Province  Treasurer  requiring  the  same, 
the  selectmen  met  upon  the  9th  day  of  November  .  .  .  and 
assessed  upon  each  of  the  Inhabitants  of  said  town  their 
respective  proportion  of  ninety  and  six  pounds  and  deliv- 
ered the  lists  thereof  unto  the  constables  of  said  town  to 
collect  and  carry  in  to  said  Treasurer  as  the  Law  required, 

^Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  2,  p.  213;  Watertown  Town  Records,  pp.  130, 
139- 
2  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  10.  *  Ibid.,  p.  82. 

*  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  88. 


77]  TOWN  FINANCES  yy 

of  which  sum  Constable  Joseph  Warren  was  to  collect  the 
sum  of  forty  and  six  pounds  and  Constable  John  Griggs 
the  sum  of  fifty  pounds."  ^ 

The  province  treasurer  sometimes  addressed  the  warrant 
for  the  collection  of  the  taxes  to  the  selectmen,  and  some- 
times to  the  assessors,  who  are  usually  the  selectmen  and 
the  commissioner.^ 

The  rate  must  be  paid  in  to  the  colony  treasurer  by  the 
20th  of  the  9th  month.  ^ 

With  the  country  rate  a  poll  tax  was  always  combined. 
In  1646  the  colony  ordered  this  to  be  206.  yearly,  and  di- 
rected that  it  should  be  collected  from  "  every  male  with- 
in this  jurisdiction,  servant  or  other,  of  the  age  of  sixteen 
years  and  upward."  *  The  amount  was  increased  in  1647 
to  2s,  6d,  but  the  former  rate  was  restored  in  1653.''  There 
is  no  record  of  any  change  being  made  in  the  colony  rate 
by  these  towns  except  by  the  town  of  Roxbury.  That  town 
ordered  in  169^^  that  all  males  over  sixteen,  except  those 
exempted  by  the  General  Court,  should  be  assessed  at  4s 
per  head. 

It  would  be  interesting  to  note  the  amount  of  money  con- 
tributed yearly  by  these  towns  to  the  colony,  but  it  is  im- 
possible to  find  the  exact  amount  contributed  by  any  except 
Watertown  and  Dorchester.  In  1661  the  Dorchester 
county  rate  was  a  trifle  over  sixty-three  pounds,^  while 
Watertown's  was  a  trifle  over  sixty  pounds.^  In  1648 
W^atertown  paid  forty-four  pounds,  while  in  1657  Dor- 
chester paid  seventy-eight  pounds. 

^Roxbury  Town  Records,  pp.  160,  192.  -Ibid.,  pp.  193,  209. 

8  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  2,  p.  213.  *  Ibid.,  vol.  2,  p.  173. 

**  Osgood,  American   Colonies  in   the  Seventeenth  Century,  vol.    i, 
p.  472. 
^Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  107.  ^ Ibid, 


78  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [78 

As  the  rate  was  fixed  at  a  penny  in  the  pound,  the  colony 
had  a  more  or  less  definite  revenue  to  depend  upon.  When 
a  small  amount  of  money  was  needed,  one  half  or  three 
quarters  of  a  rate  was  ordered  to  be  raised.  In  1670,  for  in- 
stance, "  The  sum  of  the  country  rate  for  Dorchester  was 
28f,  I2S,  I  id,  being  three-quarters  of  a  single  rate."  ^ 

The  county  rate  was  raised  on  the  same  principle  and 
gathered  according  to  the  same  rule  as  that  of  the  coun- 
try. It  was  not  levied  with  such  regularity  nor  was  it  so 
large  as  the  country  rate.  Watertown,  in  1657,  paid  no 
country  rate,  and  in  1658  paid  only  8f-i2s-8d,  while  its 
country  rate  was  7i£-5s-6d.  Dorchester  raised  no  county 
rate  in  1657,  1659,  1662,  1670, — unless  it  was  combined 
with  the  country  rate,  as  was  done  in  1665,^  while  in 
1666  it  paid  to  the  country  treasurer  64£-oos-3d  and  to  the 
county  only  i3£-o6s-8d.^  Cambridge  does  not  mention  pay- 
ing a  county  rate  in  1648  and  1649.* 

The  constables  were  the  officers  in  charge  of  the  coun- 
try and  county  rates,  as  they  were  of  the  town  rates.  They 
were  compelled  to  send  all  country  and  county  rates  called 
for  by  the  warrant  to  the  respective  treasurers.  This  had 
to  be  done  promptly  and  the  constables  were  compelled  to 
receive  from  the  treasurer  receipts  for  the  full  amount  sent 
in  order  to  be  discharged  by  the  selectmen  from  all  respon- 
sibility.'^ An  example  of  the  receipt  received  by  a  constable 
from  the  country  and  county  treasurer  is  given  in  the  Dor- 
chester records : 

"Received  the  17th  of  April,  1666,  of  Mr.  Stephen  Minot,  Constable 

^Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  172. 
2  Ibid.,  pp.  95,  97,  loi,  113,  129. 
8  Ibid.,  p.  133  and  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  104. 
*  Cambridge  Town  Records,  pp.  77,  84. 

'^  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  104 ;  Watertown  Town  Records,  pp. 
72,  53;  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  172. 


79]  TOWN  FINANCES  79 

of  Dorchester  in  full  of  their  rate  due  to  the  country  for  the  year 
past  the  sum  of  sixty-four  pounds,  three  pence.  I  say  received  as 
above. 

According  to  my  warrant. 

Richard  Russell,  Treasurer." 

"  Received  the  9th  of  May,  1666  of  Mr.  Steven  Minott,  in  full  of 
a  county  rate,  due  from  the  town  of  Dorchester,  the  Sum  of  thirteen 
pounds  six  shillings,  eight  pence.    I  say  Received 

Edward  Tyng, 
Treasurer  for  the  County  of  Suffolk."  1 

In  1636  the  General  Court  ordered  that  any  constable 
who  did  not  pay  to  the  treasurer  the  sum  called  for  in  the 
warrant  within  one  month  after  receiving  the  warrant,  and 
not  sending  any  excuse  satisfactory  to  the  Treasurer,  could 
be  sued  for  the  required  amount  by  the  Treasurer."  ^ 

In  raising  both  country  and  county  rates  a  larger  sum 
was  gathered  than  was  called  for  in  the  warrants.  In  1666 
the  country  rate  of  Dorchester  was  9i£-05s-iid,^  of  which 
amount  the  treasurer  was  to  have  85£-ios-ood,  the  deputies, 
5f-ios-ood.  In  1667  the  amount  raised  was  8o£-2s-ood, 
of  which  only  64£-i9s-ood  went  to  the  country  treasurer. 
Of  the  remainder,  4£  was  given  to  each  of  the  deputies,  and 
3£  to  Nicholas  George,  "  who  kept  a  house  of  common*  en- 
tertainment "  in  Dorchester,  leaving  a  balance  of  4£-3s-ood.* 
Dorchester,  as  a  rule,  seems  to  have  included  in  its  country 
rate  the  expenses  of  the  deputies.^  Roxbury,  too,  always 
raised  a  larger  rate  than  it  paid  to  the  treasurer.  The  fol- 
lowing statement  of  the  selectmen  of  that  town  in  levying 
the  three  rates  in  1692  explains  this:  "  There  is  a  consider- 
able surplus  in  the  whole  of  these  three  rates  for  making 
good  what  may  fall  short  on  any  account  and  not  to  be  ob- 
tained by  the  Constables."  ® 

1  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  I33-      ^  Mass.  Col.  Rec ,  vol.  i,  p.  179. 

8  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  137-  *  Jbid.,  p.  140. 

5  Ihid.,  pp.  163,  169,  186.  ®  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  154. 


8o  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [go 

This  seems  to  have  been  a  wise  step  on  the  part  of  the 
selectmen  of  Roxbury,  for  in  Salem  it  was  often  difficult 
to  raise  the  amount  called  for  by  the  warrant.  When  such 
a  deficit  occurred,  some  public-spirited  citizen  of  Salem 
loaned  to  the  town  money  sufficient  to  make  up  the  amount 
called  for  by  the  warrant,  which  sum  was  repaid  him  from 
the  next  rate.  In  1643  it  was  "  agreed  that  whereas  Mr. 
Hathorne  allowed  to  the  constables  40s  to  make  up  their 
account  to  the  Treasurer  wch  was  due  unto  him  vppon  ac- 
count of  the  town  in  this  last  account,  That,  Therefore, 
these  Cunstables  would  forthwith  pay  vnto  Mr.  Hawthor  [ne] 
the  said  40s  out  of  the  rate  they  are  now  gathering."  Water- 
town  made  its  rates  "  with  as  little  surplusage  as  possible," 
and  any  sum  remaining  after  the  payment  of  the  rate  was 
added  to  the  next  rate  or  used  for  some  town  purpose,  as, 
in  July  1675,  to  buy  bullets  and  a  law  book  for  the  town.  ^ 

An  illustration  of  the  many  expenses  met  out  of  the 
country  rate  is  given  in  an  order  from  the  selectmen  of 
Dorchester  to  the  Constable  in  1670: 

"The  same  day  ther  was  order  given  out  to  the  Constable  to  pay 
out  of  the  Country  Rate  as  followeth. 

£      s.    d. 

Imp.  to  the  Treasurer  or  his  order 22 — 08 — 10 

It.  to  Nicholas  Bolton  for  part  of  his  labor 01 — 00 — 00 

It.  to  Capt:  Foster  as  deputy 02—00 — 00 

It.  to  William  Summer  as  deputy 02 — 00 — 00 

It.  to  Tho.  Tolman  Sen.  for  pay  of  his  work  about 

wheels    00 — 05 — 00 

It.  to  Jn  Tolman  for  the  like  worke 00—01—08 

It.  to  Nichols  George  pay  of  what  is  due  to  him  for  ex- 
penses the  last  year 00 — 10 — 00 

It.  Tho.  Moadsly  his  rate  not  pay  being  poor 00 — 02 — 06 

It.  Samuell  Minot's  rate  not  pay 00 — 01 — 00 

28 — 09 — 00 
Rest  due  00—03—10 

1  WatertoTJun  Town  Records,  p.  137. 

2  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  172. 


ffl    jSi 


CHAPTER  IV 
Town  Lands 

The  most  characteristic  feature  of  a  New  England  town 
was  its  land  system.  This  was  a  curious  combination  of 
land  owned  in  severalty  and  land  held  in  common, — a  com- 
plicated arrangement  but  one  which  seemed  perfectly  na- 
tural to  the  New  England  settler,  since  it  included  so  many 
of  the  features  in  the  management  of  land  to  which  he  had 
always  been  accustomed  in  England.  By  this  system,  the 
home  lots  and  planting  fields  were  owned  in  severalty 
though  the  latter  were  subject  to  common  regulations  as  to 
choice  of  crops,  manner  of  fencing,  and  reservation  of  herb- 
age, and  were,  moreover,  common  from  the  time  the  crops 
were  gathered  until  it  was  time  to  sow  again,  while  the 
pasture  fields,  the  woods,  and  meadows  were  held  abso- 
lutely in  common  and  were  regulated  by  town  ordinances. 

The  land  for  the  town  was  usually  granted  by  the  Gen- 
eral Court  to  a  group  of  men  who  formed  the  nucleus  of 
the  little  settlement  and  who  divided  the  grant  into  home 
lots,  assigned  the  planting  fields,  and  designated  the  pasture 
and  meadow  lands.  Though  the  settlers  of  Salem,  Dor- 
chester, Roxbury,  Cambridge,  and  Watertown  did  not  wait 
for  any  grant  from  the  company  but  settled  wherever  the 
land  seemed  best  suited  for  their  purposes,  they  followed  the 
prevailing  custom  in  dividing  the  land,  in  deciding  upon 
streets,  in  assigning  home  lots,  and  in  designating  the  pas- 
ture and  meadow  lands. 

Naturally  home  lots  were  granted  first.  These  con- 
8i]  8i 


7 


82  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [82 

sisted  of  a  plot  of  ground  large  enough  for  a  house  and 
out-buildings,  a  garden,  and  usually  an  inclosure  for  feeding 
cattle  and  raising  corn.^  These  lots  were  usually  small. 
In  Salem,  until  1635,  they  were  two  acres  and  after  that 
date  only  one.^  In  Roxbury,  they  varied  from  two  to  five 
acres,  though  occasionally  nine  and  one  half  acres  were 
granted.^  In  Cambridge,  they  were  even  smaller  than  in 
Salem,  —  the  usual  size  being  one  acre  while  some  were 
only  one-quarter  of  an  acre.*  In  Dorchester,  home  lots 
were  usually  four  acres ;  '^  and  in  Watertown,  they  were 
about  the  same  size.  In  Salem,  the  home  lots  were  the  only 
land  granted  to  a  certain  class  of  inhabitants, — namely  those 
wishing  to  live  in  Salem  for  the  fisheries.  Men  engaged  in 
this  occupation  usually  wished  to  be  near  their  work,  so 
home  lots  were  granted  to  them  not  in  the  body  of  the  town 
but  on  either  the  neck  of  land  connecting  Winter's  Island 
with  the  main  land  or  at  Marblehead.  To  such  inhabitants 
"  no  other  accommodation  of  land  "  was  given  than  a  house 
lot  and  a  garden  lot  or  ground  "  for  placing  of  their  flakes  " 
and  common  of  the  wood  near  adjoining.®  Even  these 
lots  were  given  them  only  for  a  time,  the  grant  being  made 
during  the  pleasure  of  the  town  and  reverting  to  the  town 
when  the  fishermen  left."^ 

After  the  home  lots  had  been  assigned,  the  arable  land 
and  the  meadow  were  allotted  to  the  several  inhabitants. 

^  H.  B.  Adams,  Village  Communities  of  Cape  Ann  and  Salem,  J.  H.  U. 
Studies,  vol.  i,  p.  31. 
2  Salem  Town  Records,  Colls,  of  Essex  Inst.,  vol.  IX,  pp.  9,  11,  27,  33. 
»  Report  of  Boston  Record  Commissioners,  vol.  6,  pp.  37,  34.  35. 

*  Proprietor's  Records  of  Cambridge,  p.  7  et  seq. 

*  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  2. 
«  Salem  Town  Records,  p.  28. 

^  Colls,  of  Essex  Institute,  vol.  34,  p.  95. 


S^]  TOWN  LANDS  83 

The  size  of  these  allotments  varied  greatly  not  only  in 
different  towns  but  within  the  borders  of  each  town.  In 
Salem,  in  1634,  it  was  ordered  that  "  the  least  family  shall 
have  10  A  but  greater  families  may  have  more  according-^ 
to  their  numbers."  ^  These  ten-acre  lots  consisted  of  arable 
ground  and  meadow,  the  latter  of  which  if  left  to  the  use 
of  the  town  was  replaced  by  "  more  arable  ground  "  for 
the  owner's  use.^  Any  person  taking  more  than  his  allotted 
share  of  ground  was  not  only  punished  by  the  town  but 
was  forced  to  throw  open  again  whatever  he  had  taken  in 
excess  of  his  grant.  These  lots  were  granted  to  heads  of 
families  irrespective  of  sex : — "  Tom  Moore's  widow  "  had 
ten  acres  assigned  her  and  "  Mistress  Fellows  and  Son, 
twenty  A."  After  1636  this  regulation  concerning  ten- 
acre  lots  was  no  longer  in  force,  the  amount  of  land  granted 
each  inhabitant  being  left  to  the  selectmen.  However,  even 
before  this,  grants  of  land  were  not  limited  in  size  to  ten 
acres.  Larger  grants  were  frequently  made  sometimes  in- 
cluding two  hundred  or  three  hundred  acres.  Grants  of 
this  size  were  usually  remote  from  the  town, — "  on  the 
north  side  of  the  river  "  or  "  at  the  head  of  Bass  River." 

Every  settler  of  Dorchester  was  given  in  addition  to  his 
home  lot  "  a  great  lot  "  of  sixteen  to  twenty  acres,^.  near 
Naponset  river  or,  when  the  land  there  was  exhausted, 
near  Roxbury.  These  great  lots  were  usually  meadow 
land.  They  were  laid  out  by  men  appointed  for  that  pur- 
pose and  were  given  to  those  who  manifested  at  the  monthly 
meeting  a  desire  to  have  them  if  this  desire  met  with  the  ap- 
proval of  the  meeting.*  When  there  was  no  more  room  in 
these  quarters  for  the  assignment  of  lots,  land  was  granted 

^  Salem  Town  Records,  p.  14.  *  Ibid.,  p.  15. 

8  Dorchester  Town  Records,  pp.  4,  18,  i. 
*  Ibid.,  p.  4. 


84  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [84 

in  different  sections  of  the  town  so  that  by  1633  there  were 
five  great  fields  in  Dorchester,  namely  the  great  lots,  the 
West  field,  the  South  field,  the  East  field,  and  the  North 
field.^ 

In  Watertown,  no  account  is  given  of  the  assignment  of 
the  home  lots  or,  as  they  were  called  there,  "  these  small 
lots,"  but  there  is  a  very  complete  record  of  the  allotment  of 
the  large  pasture  fields  i.  e.  all  the  land  lying  west  of  the 
small  lots  which  land  was  at  that  time  called  "  the  Great 
Dividents."  By  July,  1636,  this  land  was  divided  into 
four  parts,  ^ach  part  being  one  hundred  and  sixty  rods  in 
breadth,  beginning  next  the  small  lots  which  lay  toward  the 
Cambridge  line  on  the  east,  and  bounded  by  the  Cambridge 
line  on  the  north  and  the  plough  lands  on  the  south.  These 
were  laid  out  "  sucessively  one  after  another  (all  the 
meadows  and  cartways  only  being  excepted)  for  them  to 
inclose  in  common,"  ^  and  the  freemen  allotted  shares  of 
this  land  to  "  all  the  Townsmen  then  inhabiting  "  being  one 
hundred  and  twenty  in  number.  The  first  "divident,"  contain- 
ing about  one  thousand  and  ninety  acres,  was  divided  among 
thirty-one  men  in  lots  ranging  in  size  from  twenty  to 
seventy  acres;  the  second,  consisting  of  twelve  hundred 
and  seventy-five  acres,  was  given  thirty  men  each  one  receiv- 
ing on  an  average  thirty-five  acres  though  Mr.  Phillips' 
share  of  this  allotment  was  eighty  acres;  the  third,  con- 
sisting of  eleven  hundred  and  five  acres,  to  thirty  people, 
among  whom  was  Sir  Richard  Saltonstall.  These  allotments 
varied  from  one  hundred  to  twenty  acres.  The  fourth,  was 
given  twenty-nine  people  in  lots  ranging  from  twenty  to 
sixty  acres. 

Before  these  lands   were   divided   the   "plow   lands   at 

^Dorchester  Town  Records,  pp.  i,  3,  10. 

2  Watertown,  Book  of  Lands,  Grants,  and  Possessions,  p.  3. 


85]  TOWN  LANDS  85 

Beverbrook  Plain"  were  granted  to  the  different  inhabitants 
of  Watertown.  Only  one  hundred  and  six  persons  shared 
in  this  division  as  these  were  "  all  the  freemen  then  in- 
habiting." These  plow  lands  began  next  "  to  the  small  lots 
beyond  the  weir  on  Charles  river  in  the  south-western  part 
of  the  town  "  and  were  bounded  with  the  great  lots  on 
the  north  side  and  Charles  River  on  the  South,  divided  by 
a  cartway  in  the  midst.  The  first  lot  was  next  the  river, 
the  second  on  the  north  side  of  the  cartway,  and  so  on  until 
all  the  lots  were  ended.  About  six  hundred  and  ninety- 
seven  acres  were  included  in  these  plow  lands  and  the  lots 
assigned  there  varied  from  one  to  forty  acres,  the  latter 
amount  being  given  to  Mr.  Phillips  only. 

Division  of  one  kind  of  land  was  followed  soon  after  by 
the  division  of  another  kind.  In  February  of  the  following 
year,  1637,  the  town  passed  an  ordinance  "  that  all  town 
land  should  be  divided,"  in  obedience  to  which  order,  the 
"  Remote  or  West  Pine  meadows  "  containing  about  seven 
hundred  and  fifty  acres  were  alloted  "  all  the  townsmen 
then  inhabiting  being  113  in  number."  A  new  rule  was 
adopted  in  dividing  these  lands,  namely,  that  one  acre  was 
allowed  each  townsman  and  one  additional  acre  was  added 
for  every  head  of  cattle  valued  at  twenty  pounds  to  the  head. 
The  lots  were  to  begin  "  next  to  Plain  Meadow  and  so  to 
go  on  until  the  lots  be  ended."  The  grants  made  according 
to  this  rule  varied  in  size  from  one  to  forty  acres.  On 
April  9th,  1638,  the  division  of  the  town  plot  was  deter- 
mined upon,  the  selectmen  being  ordered  to  divide  it  among 
about  forty  persons  "  who  lived  more  remote  from  the  meet- 
ing house  and  dwealt  most  scattered."  The  recipients  of 
these  grants  were  obliged  "  to  build  and  dwell  upon  them 
and  were  forbidden  to  sell  or  exchange  them  to  any  for- 
eigner." In  1642,  "  all  townsmen  that  had  not  Farms  laid 
out  formerly    "  were  ordered  to  take  them  "  by  ten  in  the 


86  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [86 

division  and  to  cast  lots  for  the  several  divisions  allowing 
13  A  of  upland  for  every  head  of  person  and  cattle." 
■  In  Cambridge,  home  lots,  plow  lands,  pasture,  and 
meadow  lands  were  granted  almost  simultaneously.  There 
is  no  record  to  show  how  this  was  done,  only  the  com- 
pleted grants  recorded  in  the  proprietors'  records  remain- 
ing. The  land  originally  left  common  to  the  whole  town, 
was  soon  divided  in  its  turn  into  lots  and  given  new  in- 
habitants. In  1635,  Fresh  Pond  meadow  west  of  the  town 
was  divided  among  the  inhabitants  each  one  receiving  a 
share,  though  the  shares  varied  in  size.  In  the  same  year, 
the  land  between  the  common  and  Charlestown  Plain  was 
given  eighteen  men  in  lots  containing  from  two  to  nine 
acres;  in  1689,  the  cow  common  "and  other  parcels  of 
land  lying  among  the  small  farms  from  Watertown  line 
to  Concord  Road  "  were  divided.  In  this  allotment,  those 
inhabitants  who  had  "  no  rights  in  the  land  but  who  had 
settled  there  were  to  have  a  share  amounting  to  twelve 
acres  more  or  less  apiece." 

•  As  a  result  of  this  method  of  allotting  land,  the  estate  of 
each  individual  was  composed  of  several  small  tracts  of 
land  lying  in  the  different  quarters  of  the  town,  at  a  greater 
or  less  distance  from  the  homes,  and  home  lots  which  were 
grouped  within  a  comparatively  small  area,  usually  near 
the  center  of  the  settlement.  In  Watertown,  the  list  of 
the  lands  owned  by  one  man  was  as  follows :  "A  homestead 
of  six  acres,  one^acre  and  a  half  of  planting  ground,  one 
acre  of  plowland  in  the  further  plain  and  nine  acres  of  up- 
land beyond  the  further  plain."  ^ 

■^  In  determining  the  amount  of  land  to  be  given  each 
settler  the  town  followed  no  definite  rule,  except  that  a  larger 
grant  was  usually  given  to  the  minister  and  to  the  leaders 

^  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  130. 


87] 


TOIVN  LANDS 


87 


of  the  enterprise.  VVatertown  gave  Sir  Richard  Salton- 
stall  one  hundred  acres  when  dividing  the  Great  Dividents, 
and  George  Phillips  twelve  acres  when  dividing  the  town 
plot — the  largest  grants  made  to  any  one. 

A'seconijLesuk^of  this  method  of  dividing  the  land  was 
the  development  of  the  system  of  common  fields,  that  is, 
of  fields  owned  in  common  and  cultivated  in  common  by 
groups  of  men  called  proprietors,  each  of  whom  might  be 
a  proprietor  in  several  fields  since  his  holdings  were  scat- 
tered among  many  fields.^ 

By  1640,  there  were  in  Salem  ten  of  these  common  fields 
of  which  the  two  best  known  were  the  North  and  South 
fields  which  continued  as  common  fields  until  the  middle  of 
the  eighteenth  century.^  North  field  was  north  of  the 
north  river.  It  contained  about  four  hundred  and  ninety 
acres  laid  out  in  ten  acre  lots.  South  field  lay  between  For- 
est and  South  rivers.  It  contained  six  hundred  acres  part 
of  which  was  soft  marsh  and  swamp.  Other  fields  of 
Salem  only  less  celebrated  than  the  ones  just  mentioned  were 
"  Glass  House  field  "  and  "  Old  Planters'  "  meadow  where 
Mr.  Conant,  John  Balch,  and  Mr.  Woodberry  had  holdings. 

Common  fields  are  one  of  the  features  of  Dorchester 
though  more  is  learned  of  them  from  the  regulations  made 
to  govern  them  than  from  any  mention  of  them  by  name. 
One  common  field  was  situated  near  Rocky  Hill  for,  in 
1636,  this  land  was  granted  six  men  "  in  community 
amongst  them."  This  was  rather  an  unusual  grant  in  that 
definite  conditions  were  attached  to  it : — the  passage  of  peo- 
ple, carts  and  cattle  across  it  could  not  be  hindered,  and  any 
inhabitant  was  free  to  "  fetch  stones  for  building  or  other 


1  Cambridge,  Proprietors'  Records,  pp.  5,  68. 

2  H.  B.  Adams,  Common  Fields  of  Salem,  p.  8. 


88  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [88 

use  "  from  Rocky  Hill  itself.^  Other  well  known  fields  in 
Dorchester  were  the  "  Great  Lots  "  and  the  "  Six  Acre  Lots. 
By  1659,  the  common  fields  of  the  town  were  "  the  neck  of 
land,  the  field  behind  Mrs.  Stoughton's,  the  great  lots,  the 
twenty  acre  lots,  the  lot  behind  Mr.  Jones,  the  field  behind 
Mr.  Mather,  the  eight  acre  lots,  and  the  field  about  Nepon- 
set  river.  Watertown  also  had  many  common  fields.  In 
1636,  as  has  been  shown,  four  common  fields  were  made 
out  of  the  "  great  dividents  "  and  in  1640  the  hither  and 
further  plains  were  made  common  fields. 
•j-^  From  the  beginning,  common  fields,  though  owned  and 
regulated  by  the  proprietors,  were  supervised  and  controlled 
by  the  town  acting  usually  through  the^selectmen.  At  no 
time  in  the  history  of  the  town  were  they  allowed  to  pass 
beyond  the  town'sjiOQij:©}.  Regulations  about  fencing  were 
made  by  the  town  and  enforced  by  the  town.  In  Water- 
town,  when  the  hither  and  further  plains  were  made  com- 
mon fields,  every  owner  of  a  lot  there  was  ordered  to  make 
his  fence  by  the  loth  of  May,  upon  pain  of  forfeiting  his 
lot  to  the  town.  This  was  no  exceptional  ordinance. 
Every  common  field,  according  to  a  by-law  of  the  town,  must 
be  fenced  in  by  the  proprietors  of  the  field,  "  each  doing  his 
portion."  Any  individual  failing  to  live  up  to  this  regu- 
lation was  liable  to  be  summoned  before  the  selectmen  to 
answer  for  his  neglect,  and  if  the  entire  body  of  the  pro- 
prietors failed,  they  all  might  be  "  warned  to  the  next  meet- 
ing of  the  seven  men  to  show  cause  why  they  should  not 
fence  according  to  proportion."  In  1659,  ^^^  instance,  "  the 
possessors  of  the  Common  field  between  the  highway,  mill, 
river,  and  Dorchester  field  "  were  summoned  to  give  rea- 
sons for  refusing  to  fence.  If  this  interview  produced  no 
result,  the  fence  viewers  were  empowered  by  the  selectmen 
*  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  36. 


89]  TOWN  LANDS  89 

to  have  the  fence  built,  the  selectmen  engaging  to  see  that 
they  were  reimbursed.  An  ordinance  of  1653  defined 
carefully  the  relation  between  the  owners  of  the  common 
fields  and  the  town  of  Watertown.  It  decreed  that  all  gen- 
eral fields  that  had  been  inclosed  by  the  initial  act  of  the 
commoners,  by  planting  and  fencing  together,  were  ac- 
counted by  the  town  general  fields.  As  such,  the  bounds 
must  continue  to  be  as  first  inclosed,  and  every  commoner 
was  required  to  fence  in  all  his  planting  land,  meadow,  or 
pasture  land,  unless  he  gave  notice  to  the  other  commoners 
seven  months  before  any  summer  grain  was  sown  or 
planted  that  he  would  not  improve  his  land  any  longer. 
Even  the  height  of  the  fences  around  a  common  field  was 
determined  by  law.  They  were  required  to  be  four 
rails,  three  feet  and  a  half  high,  and  must  be  up  by  April 
first  and  stay  up  until  the  summer  grain  was  in  and,  in 
fields  where  English  grain  was  sown,,  fences  must  be 
kept  up  in  winter  as  well  as  in  summer.  Roxbury  and 
Dorchester  also  passed  ordinances  for  the  regulating  of 
their  common  fields.  In  Dorchester  some  of  the  fences 
had  to  be  six  feet  high :  "  the  great  lots "  must  be. 
inclosed  "  by  a  good  sufficient  fence  six  feet  long  and  the 
rails  not  above  ten  feet  between  the  posts ;"  ^  while  in  Rox- 
bury fences  had  to  be  sufficient  for  the  "  safeguard  of  corn." 
Men  owning  adjoining  lots  some  times  agreed  to  maintain 
the  fence  between  their  two  lots  jointly.  In  1642  Elder 
Heath  and  Captain  Joseph  Weld  of  Roxbury  agreed  that 
Heath  "  should  make  and  maintain  all  the  outside  fence 
from  his  house  to  the  top  of  the  lane  leading  up  to  the  meet- 
ing-house and  so  to  Jasper  Rawlin's  orchard,  and  Captain 
Joseph  Weld  to  make  and  maintain  the  fences  between  him 
and  Isaac  Heath  quite  through  between  their  two  lots."  ^ 
^  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  5.      2  Roxbury  Tozvn  Records,  p.  10. 


90  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [go 

"^  Since  the  fencing  of  fields  was  so  important  for  the 
prosperity  of  the  town,  it  was  necessary  to  have  officials 
whose  duty  it  was  to  see  that  this  was  properly  done. 
Hence  fence  viewers  are  prominent  officials  of  all  seven- 
teenth century  towns.  These  were  sometimes  elected  by  the 
towns  in  the  annual  town  meeting,  sometimes  appointed  by 
the  selectmen,  and  sometimes  named  by  the  proprietors 
themselves  at  the  request  of  the  selectmen,  as  happened  in 
Dorchester  in  1653  when  the  selectmen,  hearing  of  the 
damage  being  caused  by  defective  fences,  desired  "  that  the 
proprietors  of  each  field  that  it  concerns  would  of  them- 
selves appoint  two  or  more  as  they  shall  see  meet  to  view 
all  such  places."  ^  The  fences  these  officials  were  to  in- 
spect were  usually  designated  when  they  were  elected  or 
appointed,  as  in  Dorchester  in  1662  when  fence  viewers 
were  appointed  "  for  the  necke  of  land,  for  the  great  lot, 
and  for  the  twenty-acre  lot."  In  Dorchester  the  method 
of  procedure  to  be  followed  by  the  fence  viewers  was  care- 
fully regulated  by  town  ordinances: — ^when  a  fence  was 
found  defective  they  were  required  to  view  it  twice  before 
calling  the  attention  of  the  selectmen  to  it,  once  when  it 
was  found  defective,  and  again  six  days  after  giving  notice 
of  its  condition  to  the  owner.  When  they  had  reported 
it  to  the  selectmen,  their  duty  was  done  and  further  action 
remained  with  the  selectmen,  who  were  required  to  summon 
the  owner  before  them  to  answer  for  his  neglect. 
^  All  questions  of  cultivating  and  planting  common  fields 
were  settled  by  the  proprietors  of  each  field,  when  they 
could  agree  in  what  manner  this  was  to  be  done.  This 
privilege  was  allowed  them  by  both  town  and  colony,  but 
"  where  the  commoners  could  not  agree  about  the  manner 

^Dorchester   Town   Records,   pp.   64,   66,    114.   and   Roxhury    Town 
Records,  p.  137. 


91  ]  TOWN  LANDS  91 

of  improving  of  their  fields,  the  kind  of  grain  to  be  sown, 
or  the  manner  of  feeding  the  herbage  thereof,"  the  select- 
men were  empowered  by  the  General  Court  in  1643  "  to 
order  the  same,  and,  where  no  such  are,  the  major  part  "  of 
the  freemen  were  allowed  to  ''  decide  and  settle  any  differ- 
ence." ^  However,  the  commoners  usually  settled  such 
matters  among  themselves  and  only  occasionally  appealed  to 
the  selectmen.  The  towns  themselves  passed  ordinances 
allowing  the  proprietors  of  the  common  fields  the  privilege 
of  managing  their  own  fields.  Salem,  in  1684,  allowed  the 
proprietors  of  the  north  field  to  make  such  orders  as  they 
might  from  time  to  time  find  necessary  for  the  fencing 
and  improving  the  field,  providing  these  orders  were  first 
approved  of  by  the  selectmen. 

The  organization  of  a  body  of  proprietors  is  seen  most 
clearly  in  the  case  of  the  proprietors  of  the  South  field  of 
Salem.  These  met  on  the  "  last  day  in  February  in  every 
year  for  the  making  of  such  orders  as  may  be  needful  for 
the  good  of  the  South  Field."  They  were  definitely  organ- 
ized and  had  two  officers,  the  moderator  and  the  clerk, 
whose  duty  it  was  to  appoint  the  place  of  meeting  and  notify 
the  proprietors  to  attend.  Attendance  upon  the  meeting 
of  the  proprietors  was  compulsory,  a  fine  being  imposed 
for  non-attendance.  The  meeting  was  conducted  accord- 
ing to  parliamentary  rules,  minutes  were  kept,  and  by  this 
meeting  several  minor  officials  were  appointed, — the  sur- 
veyors of  fences  for  the  field  and  the  Haward  or,  "watchman 
upon  the  walls  of  the  pasture,"  whose  duty  it  was  to  repair 
gates,  impound  horses  and  cattle  running  at  large,  drive  out 
all  animals  in  the  spring  and  break  down  barriers  in  the 
fall.  While  it  is  hardly  probable  that  all  bodies  of  proprie- 
tors of  common  fields  were  so  definitely  organized,  all  must 

1  Mass.  Arch.,  vol.  45,  p.  8. 


92  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [92 

have  had  some  kind  of  organization  more  or  less  resembl- 
ing that  of  the  proprietors  of  the  South  Field.  There  is 
no  mention  of  officers  being  chosen  by  any  other  body  of 
proprietors,  and  it  seems  more  probable  that  they  met  when- 
ever they  had  business  to  discuss  and  appointed  some  one 
of  their  number  to  carry  into  effect  the  measures  they 
decided  upon. 

At  first  every  proprietor  of  a  commoa  field  v^as  at  liberty 
to  pasture  on  any  field  in  which  he  owned  a  share  or  Jii  the 
common  pasture  fields  of  the  town  an  unlimited  number  of 
animals^  This  privilege,  however,  was  soon  withdrawn. 
Dorchester,  as  early  as  1638,  ordered  that  every  person 
who  put  any  cattle  of  any  kind  whatsoever  into  the  great 
neck  should  give  a  note  of  how  many  he  put  in  and  if  it  was 
found  that  any  man  was  putting  in  "  more  than  his  stint  " 
he  should  "  forfeit  twenty  shillings  for  every  cow  or  other 
cattle  so  put  in  above  his  stint."  ^  And  that  same  year  the 
"  great  lots  "  were  stinted  to  "  6  acres  a  cow,  the  meadow 
and  eight  acre  lots  the  like,  the  twenty  acre  lots  at  ten  acres 
a  cow."  ^  Salem,  in  1680,  decided  that  each  proprietor  who 
owned  ten  acres  could  pasture  six  cows,  four  oxen,  three 
horses,  or  twelve  yearling  or  twenty-four  calves,  and  so  on 
in  proportion  as  he  held  a  greater  or  less  number  of  acres. 

Proprietors  of  common  fields  had  certain  privileges  in 
harvest  time.  If  they  needed  help  at  that  time  they  could 
secure  it  from  the  "  artificers  or  handicrafters  men  "  by 
applying  to  the  constable  who,  under  the  authority  given 
him  by  a  colony  law  passed  in  1646,  could  require  "  arti- 
ficers or  handicrafts  men  ...  to  labour  and  to  worke  by  ye 
day  for  their  neighbors  needing  help  in  mowing  and  reap- 
ing "  provided  those  whom  they  helped  should  duly  pay  for 
the  work.^ 

1  Dorchester  Town  Records,  pp.  37,  84.  ^  Jijid.,  p.  38. 

3  H.  B.  Adams,  Common  Fields  of  Salem  Essex  Institute,  vol.  19, 
p.  241  et.  seq. 


93]  TOWN  LANDS  93 

In  addition  to  these  fields  owned  and  worked  by  groups 
of  proprietors,  each  town  throughout  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury contained  land  absolutely  common  to  all,  namely, 
the  town  common,  the  pasture  fields,  the  woodland,  and  the 
meadow  as  yet  undivided.  In  Salem  a  very  important 
field  of  this  kind  was  the  cow  pasture  or  "  Cattle  Range," 
since  called  the  great  pasture.  This  began  at  "  Forest  head 
where  the  first  waterfall  was  and  where  the  salt  water 
fiowe  at  high  water  mark  southward  and  up  to  Mr.  Hum- 
phrey's farm  and  thence  to  the  pond  and  so  about  to 
Brooksby."  The  town  decreed  in  1640  that  "  none  of  the 
land  within  the  cattle  range  shall  be  granted  to  any  man 
for  his  particular  use;"  but  this  order  was  afterwards 
repealed  and  its  four  thousand  acres  were  divided,  caus- 
ing much  confusion  in  Salem. ^  In  Dorchester,  also,  a 
common  cow  pasture  is  frequently  mentioned.^  This 
common  land  was  under  the  control  of  the  town  which, 
however,  frequently  allowed  the  selectmen  to  make  or- 
ders for  its  regulation.  In  Cambridge,  for  instance, 
the  selectmen  often  allowed  men  to  fence  in  and  use 
ungranted  land  during  their  pleasure,  and,  some  times, 
rented  it  at  a  fixed  price  for  the  erection  of  building,  such  as 
barns  or  shops.  ^  In  April,  1656,  the  selectmen  then  in 
power  allowed  "  Ed  Jacson  to  take  and  fence  in  the  high- 
ways and  common  land  near  his  meadow  during  the  pleas- 
ure of  the  townsmen."  The  selectmen  of  Roxbury,  in  1652, 
granted  the  use  of  the  woodland  and  permitted  the  fencing 
in  of  watering  places  and,  in  1698,  a  town  meeting  called 
to  decide  the  question  directed  the  selectmen  "  to  let  out  the 
common  land  belonging  to  the  town  over  Rocky  Swamp  for 
ten  or  twenty  years  unto  any  that  shall  appear  and  desire 

1  Felt,  Annals  of  Salem.  2  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  53. 

«  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  47. 


94  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [94 

to  hire  the  same."  ^  Dorchester  granted  the  use  of  the 
common  land  for  various  purposes  as,  in  1652,  "to  seta 
house  on  for  a  sap  house."  ^ 

As  the  town  increased  in  numbers  and  more  home  lots 
were  assigned,  the  common  undivided  land  became  less  and 
less,  finally  disappearing  almost  entirely.  Grants  made 
from  this  town  land  were  often  given  only  upon  the  fulfil- 
ment of  certain  conditions.  In  Salem  the  grantee  was 
compelled  to  promise  that,  if  he  ever  sold  the  property,  the 
town  of  Salem  should  have  the  option  of  buying  it,  or,  if 
the  grant  were  in  the  neck,  that  the  grantee  would  follow 
fishing,^  or  that  he  would  use  the  the  land  for  some  specific 
purpose,  the  non-fulfilment  of  which  nullified  the  grant. 
The  condition  usually  attached  to  a  grant  of  land  in  Cam- 
bridge was  that  the  grant  must  be  improved  within  a  cer- 
tain time,  while  the  right  to  open  up  highways  through  the 
grant  was  always  retained  by  the  town.  Moreover,  in  this 
town  the  land  and  any  buildings  erected  upon  it  could  be 
rented  only  to  such  persons  as  the  townsmen  then  in  office 
approved  of,  as  no  sale  could  be  made  without  their  con- 
sent.* Here,  too,  grants  from  the  common  land  were  often 
made  to  compensate  for  some  deficiency  in  a  former  grant. 
Roxbury  used  her  common  land  for  the  same  purposes.  In 
1653  s^^  gave  a  certain  man  a  grant  of  land  in  "  place  of 
that  which  he  fall  short  that  his  father  should  have  had  on 
meeting  house  hill,"**  and,  in  1662,  gave  six  acres  to  a  certain 

1  Roxbury  Town  Records,  pp.  4,  185. 

2  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  63. 

»  Salem  Tozvn  Records,  p.  62.  This  way  of  granting  land  was  used 
to  increase  the  industries  of  the  town.  In  1639,  for  example,  Salem 
granted  land  to  be  used  to  make  tan-pits  and  to  dress  goats'  skins,  pro- 
vided that  the  place,  if  not  used  for  that  purpose,  should  be  returned  to 
the  town. 

*  Cambridge  Tozvn  Records,  pp.  32,  33,  50. 

"  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  12. 


95]  TOWN  LANDS  95 

man  as  a  pure  act  of  justice,  "  he  being  formerly  neglected 
and  forgotten."^  In  Dorchester,  too,  such  injustice  in  assign- 
ing land  was  corrected  again  and  again.  For  instance,  a 
certain  man  was  given  "  two  acres  of  marsh  towards  Fox 
Point  in  place  of  some  land  taken  from  him  for  making  the 
way  to  the  neck,  and  another  two  and  a  half  acres  "  of  dry 
ground  adjoining  to  his  meadow  ground  in  the  Little  Neck 
as  satisfaction  for  what  he  lacked  in  his  home  lot.^ 

As  these  town  fields  were  divided,  a  certain  number  of 
the  inhabitants  of  the  town  profited  by  each  division.  Dor- 
chester, in  1637,  ordered  all  the  land  in  common  within  the 
town  on  both  sides  the  River  Naponset  to  be  divided 
among  all  the  inhabitants,  and,  in  1638,  the  land  "  last  given 
by  the  Court  beyond  the  line  from  Roxbury  bounds  to  the 
Blue  Hills  "  to  be  divided  among  all  the  freemen.  Rox- 
bury, in  1662,  realized  the  necessity  of  keeping  some  land 
in  commc«i  for  the  use  of  the  town  and  she,  therefore,  or- 
dered that  "  no  more  land  should  be  given  away  but  kept 
for  the  use  of  the  town."  ^  Watertown  and  Salem  began 
in  1636  and  1639  to  divide  their  common  land.  In  the  lat- 
ter year  Salem  measured  all  her  marsh  and  meadow  land 
and  apportioned  it  to  the  inhabitants  of  the  town,  "provided 
that  none  sell  his  meadow  nor  lease  it  for  more  than  three 
years  without  at  the  same  time  leasing  his  house." 

Commonage  of  woods,  as  well  as  of  land,  was  the  custom 
in  these  towns.  In  1636  the  selectmen  of  Salem  set  aside 
all  the  land  "  along  the  shore  on  Darby's  fort  side  up  to 
Mr.  Humphrey's  land  and  so  to  run  along  toward  Marble 
Head  1120  pole  into  the  land  for  the  commoners  of  the 
town  to  serve  them  for  wood  and  timber."  *     Dorchester 

*  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  38. 

2  Dorchester  Town  Records,  pp.  12,  40. 

3  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  39.        *  Salem   Town  Records,  p.  34. 


96  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [96 

required  those  wishing  to  gather  wood  from  the  commons 
to  first  obtain  permission  from  the  selectmen : — for  instance, 
they  allowed  a  certain  individual  to  take  "  three  thousand  of 
clapboard  of  the  common  swamp  belonging  to  Dorchester."^ 
No  non-commoner  was  allowed  by  Dorchester  to  *'  fell  any 
trees  for  timber  on  penalty  of  five  pence  for  every  tree  so 
felled."  ^  Later,  however,  certainly  by  1662,  five  hundred 
acres  of  the  common  land  were  set  aside  for  the  exclusive 
use  of  the  non-commoners.^  This  land  was  also  under  the 
control  of  the  selectmen,  who  were  authorized  to  grant  per- 
mission to  gather  timber  from  it  and  to  impose  fines  upon 
those  who  gathered  wood  there  without  their  permission. 
This  power  was  taken  from  the  selectmen  in  1657,  in  which 
year  three  men  were  appointed  to  have  charge  of  the  cutting 
of  the  wood,  any  two  of  whom  could  grant  permission  to  cut 
wood.  But  at  the  same  time  the  town  decreed  that  no  per- 
sons whatever,  whether  freemen  or  non-freemen,  commoners 
or  non-commoners,  should  "  fall  or  cut,  or  carry  away  any 
timber  or  wood  that  is  standing  or  fallen  from  off  the  com- 
mons or  any  part  of  the  land  undivided — or  from  the  high- 
way— except  such  as  have  liberty  from  those  appointed  to 
grant  liberty  for  cutting  timber." 

Over  the  common  pasture  fields  roamed  the  village  herds 
watched  over  by  the  village^  herdsmen.  These  herdsmen 
were  appointed  yearly  by  the  selectmen,  and  were  paid  by 
the  owners  of  the  cattle  a  salary  decided  upon  by  the  select- 
men. In  Cambridge  the  keeper  of  the  cattle  had 
charge  of  one  hundred  animals,  which  he  drove  "  out 
at  6  A.  M."  and  brought  "  into  the  town  from  the 
town  common  one-half  hour  before  the  sun  goes  over  night." 
No  new  animal  could  be  added  to  his  herd  without  the  con- 

"^  Dorchester  Town  Records,  pp.  41-219. 

2/&t(f.,  p.  41.  ^  Ihid.,  pp.  112-113. 


^NiVERSITY 

OF 


97]  roPFiv  L^ATDS  97 

sent  of  the  selectmen,  but  every  inhabitant  was  required 
to  entrust  his  cattle  "  into  his  keeping  "  or  "  shut  them  up."  ^ 
In  Dorchester  the  great  neck  of  land  was  one  of  the  cow 
pastures,  and  for  every  animal  pastured  there  the  owner 
paid  two  shillings.  In  1635  two  men  were  appointed  to 
keep  the  cows  ''  for  the  space  of  seven  months  to  begin  the 
fifteenth  of  April,"  but  at  other  times  the  cattle  reeves  were 
appointed  for  a  year.  The  salary  paid  them  was  3i£-ios. 
They  drove  the  cattle  forth,  gathering  them  into  a  herd  from 
certain  specified  points  whither  their  owners  had  driven 
them,  watched  them  during  the  day  and  brought  them  back 
at  night  to  these  same  points,  where  their  owners  again 
took  charge  of  them.  Any  cattle  remaining  at  large  and 
doing  any  damage  were  impounded, — the  pound  being  kept 
by  a  man  appointed  by  the  town,  who  was  paid  a  certain 
sum  for  each  animal.  The  inhabitants  were  very  loath 
to  comply  with  the  regulations  concerning  the  herd, 
and  their  failure  to  do  so  caused  so  much  trouble  in  the 
town  that  the  selectmen  in  1653  passed  very  stringent  or- 
ders upon  the  subject,  fining  for  leaving  gates  open,  for  al- 
lowing a  beast  to  trespass,  and  for  not  following  diligently 
if  compelled  to  drive  cattle  through  a  corn  field. 

Watertown,  in  1649,  provided  a  "  convenient  habitation 
for  the  herdsmen"  and  required  every  one  in  the  town  who 
owned  cattle  to  pay  him  three  shillings  a  head  whether  their 
cattle  were  under  his  care  or  not.^  Cattle  from  any  other 
town  wandering  within  Dorchester  limits  were  impounded 
and  were  not  released  until  a  fine  of  six  pence  a  head  was 
paid.  Dorchester  had  great  trouble  with  its  cattle.  The 
complaints  against  them  finally  grew  so  numerous  that  the 
town  ordered  that  there  should  be  within  the  town  but  three 

1  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  19. 

2  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  21. 


98  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [gg 

herds  and  that  every  inhabitant  must  send  his  cattle  to  one 
of  the  three.  The  number  of  herds  was  afterwards  in- 
creased to  four,  but  even  this  increase  did  not  induce  every 
inhabitant  of  the  town  to  comply  with  the  law,  and  so  many 
violations  were  reported  that,  in  1670-71,  ordinances  were 
passed  imposing  large  fines  upon  the  owners  of  all  cattle 
found  without  a  keeper.  In  Salem  the  herdsman  was  ap- 
pointed by  the  selectmen  for  a  certain  number  of  months, 
sometimes  six,  sometimes  seven.  He  was  paid  by  those 
owning  the  cattle  of  which  he  had  charge. 

Highways  within  the  town  were  the  property  of  the  town 
/^yeherl^  they  lay,  and  were  kept  in  order  by  the  inhabitants 
working  under  the  direction  of  the  surveyors  of  the  high- 
ways,— officials  elected  in  town  meeting  for  the  purpose  of 
supervising  this  work.  These  officers  could  compel  the  pres- 
ence of  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  town  to  work  upon  the 
highway  and  could  require  any  inhabitant  to  loan  his  team 
for  this  purpose.  In  Cambridge  the  surveyor  sent  each 
man  a  notice  whether  it  was  he  or  his  team  that  was  re- 
quired, and  "  any  one  refusing  or  neglecting  to  do  as  di- 
rected " — that  is,  either  to  come  himself  or  to  send  his  team, 
— was  required  to  "  forfeit  to  the  use  of  the  town  double 
the  price  of  such  labor  as  he  had  warning  to  send."  In 
Roxbury,  also,  men  were  forced  to  labor  on  the  highways 
and  to  lend  their  teams  when  they  were  called  for.  Those 
neglecting  to  do  so  were  fined,  the  constable  collecting  all 
such  fines  by  distraint,  if  necessary.^  But  the  town  excused 
men  from  their  share  of  this  labor  if  they  could  give  a  good 
reason  for  their  refusal  to  work.^  In  1663  the  highways 
of  Roxbury  were  thoroughly  inspected  by  a  commissioner. 
Some  were  made  broader,  some  two  rods  and  some  four 

1  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  144. 

2  Ibid.,  pp.  52,  189. 


99]  TOIVN  LANDS  gg 

as  the  **  highway  from  the  upper  end  of  the  lane  toward  the 
meeting  house  and  so  down  to  the  old  mill  and  so  forward 
to  Muddy  River;"  houses  were  moved  back,  fences  drawn 
in,  and  new  highways  recommended/  In  Dorchester  there 
was  no  direct  town  supervision  of  the  highways  until  1640, 
in  which  year  the  town  passed  the  ordinance  that  "  hence- 
forth there  should  be  yearly  chosen  two  officers  by  the  name 
of  supervisors  of  the  highways,  who  should  oversee  the 
making  or  mending  such  highways  as  are  defective  within 
the  plantation."  They  were  empowered  to  take  any  man's 
team  or  servant  or  "  other  workman  or  money  to  the  ef- 
fecting of  such  work  as  they  have  to  do,"  proportionally  to 
the  amount  of  land  owned  by  the  men  "  where  such  ways 
lie."  Refusal  to  "  afford  such  help  "  was  thereafter  pun- 
ished by  a  fine  of  three  shillings  per  day  for  a  man's  work 
and  six  shillings  eight  pence  for  the  work  of  the  team.^ 
And  if  any  one  sent  any  workman  under  sixteen  years  of 
age,  be  was  not  accepted,  but  the  one  sending  him  was 
liable  to  a  fine  of  two  shillings  for  his  neglect.  The  select- 
men were  given  authority  to  direct  supervisors,  giving  them 
orders  to  make  "  good  and  sufficient  the  highways  "  and 
calling  their  especial  attention  to  those  which  seemed  most 
in  need  of  repair.^  An  exact  statement  of  those  helping 
was  kept  by  the  surveyors  and  was  passed  by  those  going 
out  of  office  to  those  coming  in,  thus  preventing  any  in- 
justice through  requiring  more  work  from  one  man  than 
from  another.  Surveyors  in  Dorchester  were  elected  annu- 
ally by  the  town  meeting,  three  being  usually  chosen. 

For  the  important  duty  of  making  a  new  highway  a 
special  committee  was  sometimes  appointed  by  the  select- 

1  Ruxhury  Town  Records,  pp.  45-49. 
^Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  113. 
3  Ibid.,  p.  97. 


lOo  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [iqo 

men.  In  1660  the  selectmen  of  Dorchester  chose  two  men 
to  view  a  place  "  for  a  highway  that  may  be  convenient  .  .  . 
and  to  make  their  return  unto  the  selectmen;"  ^  and,  a  little 
later,  they  appointed  three  men  **to  lay  out  the  way  from  the 
landing  place  by  the  mill  through  Robert  Vose's  farme."  ^ 
In  all  towns  new  highways  were  made  by  the  selectmen 
upon  the  request  of  a  number  of  inhabitants.  For  instance, 
in  Dorchester,  **  at  a  meeting  of  the  selectmen  the  loth  day 
of  June,  1 66 1,  William  Robinson,  Thomas  Traft  and  the  rest 
of  the  neighbors  there  desired  that  the  way  from  the  river 
unto  the  country  highway  might  be  laid  out."  ^  When  this 
was  done,  a  report  was  made  to  the  selectmen  as  follows : 
"  We  whose  names  are  here  underwritten,  being  appointed 
to  lay  out  a  highway  from  the  country  highway,  leading  to 
the  Fresh  marsh,  we  met  the  15th  of  the  ist  mo:  1663,  and 
laid  out  two  rods  wide  from  the  country  highway  in 
breadth,  by  Visilla  Batten's  pasture  fence,  to  the  brow  of  a 
hill,  by  a  rock  lying  on  the  East  side  of  the  way  of  the 
hill,  and  from  thence  crossing  over  to  the  way  that  now 
is."*  At  times  the  selectmen  themselves  were  appointed 
by  the  town  meeting  to  view  a  highway,  "  to  determine  the 
breadth  and  course  of  it;"  ^  and,  at  times,  the  question  of 
continuing  a  highway  or  making  a  new  one  was  referred  by 
the  selectmen  to  the  town.^ 

Highways  between  different  towns  were  laid  out  by  com- 
mittees from  the  towns  concerned,  which  committees  were 
appointed  by  the  town  meetings.  In  Dorchester,  at  a  gen- 
eral town  meeting  in  1663-4,  it  was  voted  that  a  certain 
John  Smith  and  William  Robinson  should  be  appointed  to 
join  with  some  men  of  Boston  to  lay  out  a  highway  from 

^Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  100.  ^  Ihid.,  p.  102. 

8/&irf.,  pp.  101-104.  ^Ibid.,  p.  117. 

^Ibid.,  p.  108.  «/&irf.,  p.  114. 


lOi]  TOWN  LANDS  lOi 

Boston  unto  the  marsh  across  the  pastures/  However,  the 
making  of  highways  between  different  towns  lay  within  the 
province  of  the  General  Court  and  it  frequently  exercised 
this  prerogative.  For  instance,  in  1645,  i^  appointed  a  com- 
mittee to  lay  out  a  highway  ''  through  Roxbury  lots  to 
Boston,"  and  gave  the  committee  power  to  *'  impress  an 
equal  part  upon  all  such  of  Boston  or  other  towns  as  shall 
have  benefit  of  such  way,"  in  order  to  pay  the  proprietors 
of  the  lots  through  which  the  highway  was  to  pass.^ 

In  1 66 1 -2,  the  selectmen  of  Roxbury  made  an  agreement 
with  three  men  of  the  town  to  keep  the  highway  to  Dedham 
in  repair  for  three  years,  agreeing  to  pay  them  three  pounds 
ten  shillings  and  twelve  days  of  highway  work.^ 

In  addition  to  these  public  highways  there  were  in  every 
town,  particularly  in  Roxbury,  private  ways  which  in- 
dividuals were  required  to  keep  in  order.  These  were  es- 
pecially numerous  in  Roxbury,  because  that  town  required 
every  man  to  have  a  highway  in  his  own  lot,  to  accomplish 
which  "  when  the  lotts  were  first  layd  they  ware  ordered 
and  contrived  to  reach  to  the  common  road."  * 

As  a  result  of  this  peculiar  land  system,  there  were  in 
every  town  two  distinct  classes  of  inhabitants, — commoners 
or  proprietors  and  non-commoners  or  non-proprietors. 
The  first  of  these  terms — that  is  commoners  or  proprietors 
— has  two  meanings.  Originally,  it  referred  to  those  in- 
habitants of  the  town  to  whom  had  been  given  the  original 
grant  of  land  for  the  town  settlement  and  to  those  whom 
the  original  grantees  admitted  into  their  membership.  Very 
soon,  however,  the  name  came  to  have  an  additional  signi- 
ficance.  As  the  town  lands  were  divided  and  large  fields  were 

^  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  1 19. 

2  Mass.  Arch.,  vol.  121,  p.  29. 

8  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  36.  *  Ibid.,  p.  27. 


I02  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [102 

given  to  different  groups  of  men,  the  name,  commoners  or 
proprietors,  was  used  to  designate  the  men  having  shares 
in  any  of  these  common  fields.  It  is  used  throughout  the 
entire  history  of  the  New  England  town  with  these  two 
meanings.  The  second  term,  non-commoners  or  non-pro- 
prietors, is  the  name  given  to  those  inhabitants  of  the  town 
who  came  to  live  within  its  bounds  after  the  original  settle- 
ment had  been  made  and  who  were  excluded  from  all  own- 
ership in  the  common  undivided  lands  belonging  to  the  town 
as  a  whole  and  from  all  ownership  in  the  common  fields. 
Before  many  years  passed  this  class  of  inhabitants  far  ex- 
ceeded the  proprietors. 

-  The  number  of  proprietors  was  soon  limited  by  the  towns. 
In  Dorchester  no  inhabitant  could  become  a  commoner 
after  January  i8th,  1635.  It  was  then  ordered  "that  all 
the  home  lots  within  Dorchester  Plantation  which  have  been 
granted  before  this  present  day  shall  have  right  to  be  com- 
moners and  no  other  lots  that  are  granted  hereafter  to  be 
commoners:  Also  that  two  men  shall  not  common  for  one 
home  lot."  ^  In  Salem,  when  a  man  was  received  as  an  in- 
habitant he  "  purchased  accommodation "  and  had  no 
"  other  land  but  what  he  purchaseth  except  some  planting 
ground."  Here  the  class  of  non-commoners  was  always 
large,  owing  to  the  presence  of  so  many  fisherman  who  had 
either  rented  land  in  the  Neck  upon  which  to  build  their 
houses  and  fishing  places  or  to  whom  had  been  given  home 
lots  only  in  Marblehead,^  and,  to  the  presence,  of  so  many 
"  squatters,"  that  is,  inhabitants  of  the  town  who  lived  upon 
the  undivided  land  without  having  any  right  or  ownership 
in  it.  Many  of  this  latter  class  had  been  servants  who 
gradually  acquiring  a  little  money,  obtained  from  the  town 

*  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  14. 
2  Salem  Town  Records,  p.  28. 


1 03]  TOWN  LANDS  103 

the  privilege  of  building  upon  the  undivided  land  by  pay- 
ing to  the  town  a  small  rent.  This  class  gradually  grew 
in  strength  and  before  long  demanded  admittance  to  the 
privileges  of  the  commoners.  This  request  was  the  cause 
of  a  long  and  bitter  fight  in  Salem,  for  many  rich  people 
had  by  this  time  come  into  Salem  and  had  bought  house 
rights  there,  and  these  joined  forces  with  the  old  cottagers, 
or  squatters,  against  the  proprietors.  This  question  occu- 
pied the  attention  of  the  proprietors  of  Salem  far  more  than 
did  the  excitement  over  witchcraft.  The  question  of  ad- 
mitting them  to  the  privilege  of  commoners  was  taken  up 
by  the  General  Court,  which  decreed  in  1660  that  no  cot- 
tage or  mere  dwelling  house,  except  such  as  were  already 
in  existence  or  that  should  be  erected  by  the  town's  consent, 
should  admit  the  owner  to  the  right  of  commonage.^  In 
spite  of  this  order,  however,  the  cottagers  of  Salem,  in  1678, 
attempted  to  call  a  meeting  of  those  of  their  number  who 
had  been  cottagers  before  1660  to  demand  a  share  in  the 
commonage  of  the  town.  This  meeting  the  selectmen  for- 
bade, but  the  agitation  was  continued  by  the  cottagers  and 
finally  grew  to  such  proportions  that  the  commoners  were 
forced  to  yield.  In  1702  they  decided  that  "  For  ye  en- 
couragement and  growth  of  this  town,  that  all  freeholders 
of  the  town,  viz. — every  one  that  hath  a  dwelling-house  and 
land  of  his  own  proper  estate  in  fee  simple,  shall  have  and 
is  hereby  admitted  into  ye  privilege  of  commonage."  At 
the  same  time,  however,  the  commoners  provided  that  all 
questions  relating  to  the  divisions  of  land,  to  fencing,  or  to 
the  disposal  of  the  commons,  should  be  brought  before  the 
town  meeting  and  there  settled,  and,  as  the  commoners  al- 
ways controlled  those  meetings  either  by  numbers  or  in- 
fluence, the  regulation  of  the  commonage  still  remained  in 

^  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  4,  pt:  i,  p.  417. 


104  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [104 

their  hands/  The  whole  question  was  finally  settled  in 
1 714,  by  setting  aside  certain  portions  for  the  perpetual 
use  of  the  town,  and,  in  1722,  by  dividing  the  remainder, — 
over  four  thousand  acres, — among  the  one  thousand  one 
hundred  and  thirty-two  claimants.^ 

In  Cambridge  the  land  community  and  the  political  com- 
munity was  sharply  divided,  the  land  being  managed  solely 
by  the  commoners.  But,  in  addition  to  the  common  land 
owned  and  managed  by  the  commoners,  there  was  in  this 
town  common  land  belonging  to  all  the  inhabitants  of  the 
town,  whether  original  settlers  or  not.  This  was  disposed 
of  and  managed  by  all  the  inhabitants  in  the  regular 
town  meeting,  called  for  political  purposes.  For  instance, 
in  1695,  the  inhabitants  of  the  town  returned  "unto  a  certain 
Joseph  Bartlett  the  sum  of  money  it  had  received  of  him 
five  years  ago  for  a  small  parcell  of  land  sold  unto  him 
then."  ^  Many  similar  cases  are  found  in  the  records  of  the 
town.  The  land,  so  managed,  may  have  been  land  forfeited 
to  the  town  at  different  times  through  failure  of  its  owners 
to  comply  with  the  town  regulations  or  land  seized  in  pay- 
ment of  debt.  This  suggestion  is  supported  by  an  entry 
in  the  proprietors'  records  for  June  7th,  1648: — "These 
present  do  witness  that  Thomas  Brigham  having  a  parcel 
of  land  about  three  acres  more  or  less  ...  he  does  fully 
resign  all  his  rights  of  the  same  into  the  hands  of  the  towns- 
men from  him  and  his  forever;"  *  by  another,  settling  the 
bounds  of  some  land  "  belonging  to  the  town  by  an  execu- 
tion  obtained   against   a   certain   widow   of   the   aforesaid 

1  H,  B.  Adams,  Great  Pastures  of  Salem,  p.  168. 
^  Essex  Institutes,  vol,  20.  p.    178.     The   report   of  the   Proprietors' 
meeting  Nov.  22,  1714. 

*  Proprietors'  Records  of  Cambridge,  pp.  157  and  206;  Town  Records, 
pp.  66,  67,  69. 

*  Proprietors'  Records  of  Cambridge,  p.   154. 


I05]  TOWN  LANDS  105 

town;"  ^  and  by  a  third  entry  for  Sept.  7th,  1650,  mention- 
ing land  on  the  south  side  of  the  Charles  River  as  land 
"  assigned  unto  the  town  for  payment  of  a  debt  due  to  the 
town."  ^  Or,  this  common  land  may  have  been  part  of  the 
land  given  Cambridge  when  the  original  grant  to  the  town 
became  too  small,  owing  to  the  arrival  there  of  new  settlers. 
The  following  quotations  seem  to  support  this  conclusion: 
in  1647,  the  "  town  granted  land  upon  the  head  of  the  eight 
mile  line,"  the  territory  which  was  added  to  the  original 
grant  in  1636,  and  land  on  the  "  Menotomy  River  "  also 
an  additional  grant.  In  whatever  way  these  lands  were  ac- 
quired, they  were  controlled  by  the  town  and  were  granted 
to  the  inhabitants  at  the  pleasure  of  the  town.^ 

Every  town  had  control  over  the  streams  within  its  bounds^ 
and  granted  the  use  of  them  to  men  who  requested  the 
privilege.  Dorchester,  in  1633,  granted  to  a  Mr.  Israel 
Stoughton  **  the  privilege  of  a  weir  at  Naponset  adjoining 
to  his  mills  .  .  .  tliat  none  shall  cross  the  river  with  a  net  or 
other  weir  to  the  prejudice  of  the  said  weir."  *  Salem,  in 
1636,  granted  a  certain  John  Stone  permission  to  keep  a 
ferry  between  North  Point  and  Cape  Ann  Side  for  three 
years,  requiring  him  to  charge  all  inhabitants  one  penny 
for  every  trip,  and  strangers,  two  pence.  In  1637  per- 
mission was  granted  to  another  man  to  keep  the  ferry  be- 
tween Salem  and  Marblehead.^  Cambridge,  in  1635,  al- 
lowed a  Mr.  Cooke  to  keep  the  ferry,  ordering  that  he 
should  have  "  a  penny  over  and  a  half  penny  on  lecture 
^ays." '  •—— 

1  Proprietors'  Records  of  Cambridge,  p.  207. 

2  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  87.  ^  Ibid.,  p.  67. 
*  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  5. 

'^  Felt,  Annals  of  Salem,  vol.  i,  p.  299. 
^Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  15. 


CHAPTER  V 
Town  Government 

For  the  first  few  years  after  the  founding  of  the  Massa- 
chusetts Bay  Colony,  the  only  organ  of  government  in  the 
towns  within  its  limits  was  the  town  meeting  or  general 
assembly  of  all  the  male  inhabitants  of  the  town.  Even 
this  body  had  legally  no  governmental  authority,  but  was 
an  extra-legal  assembly  made  necessary  by  the  circum- 
stances which  forced  the  early  colonists  under  the  leader- 
ship of  Winthrop  to  separate  into  different  groups  and 
form  several  small  settlements,  instead  of  one  large  planta- 
tion as  had  been  planned.  To  regulate  the  affairs  of  each 
of  these  settlements,  some  kind  oi  local  government  was 
necessary,  and  this  the  settlers  themselves  created  by  meet- 
ing together  to  plan  and  carry  into  effect  the  necessary  meas- 
ures. The  charter,  under  which  the  colony  was  planted, 
said  nothing  about  towns  and,  consequently,  authorized  no 
form  of  town  government.  On  the  contrary,  it  mentioned  f 
only  one  governmental  body — the  eighteen  assistants — 
which,  with  the  governor  and  deputy-governor,  was  to 
govern  the  colony. 

It  placed  the  government  of  the  company  in  their  hands, 
and  they  might  have  continued  to  govern — at  least  for  a 
time — if  the  original  plan  of  settlement  could  have  been 
carried  out.  But  the  failure  of  the  latter  caused  the  failure 
of  the  former.  Conditions  had  to  be  met  for  which  no 
provisions  were  made  in  the  charter,  and  these  the  colonists 
io6  [io6 


I07]  TOIVN  GOVERNMENT  107. 

met  in  their  own  way; — at  first  by  the  members  of  each 
group  meeting  in  a  body,  discussing  ways  and  means,  de- 
ciding upon  a  definite  course  of  action  and  appointing  men 
to  carry  this  into  effect.  This  seems  a  natural  course  for 
men  to  pursue  who  were  making  settlements  in  an  unknown 
country,  under  circumstances  which  required  for  success 
harmony  and  unity  of  action,  where  no  form  of  govern- 
ment was  prescribed.  It  was  the  only  form  of  government 
in  force  in  all  towns  until  they  grew  so  large  that  they  found 
other  organs  of  government  necessary. 

The  town  meeting  at  first  was  not  only  an  extra-legal 
body,  but  had,  moreover,  for  some  time,  no  organization, 
no  regular  time  of  meeting,  no  specified  number  of  meet- 
ings, no  definite  duties,  and  no  requirement  about  attend- 
ance. These,  however,  were  soon  adopted  by  action  of 
the  towns  themselves,  in  which  action  the  General  Court 
concurred,  because  it  recognized  the  necessity  of  allowing 
the  freemen  of  each  town  to  regulate  and  manage  their 
local  affairs.  Cambridge,  as  early  as  1632,  began  this 
movement,  making  an  agreement  by  a  general  conference 
for  a  monthly  meeting.  "Agreed  that  every  person  under 
subscribed  shall  meet  every  second  Monday  in  every  month 
within  the  meeting-house  in  the  afternoon  within  half  an 
hour  after  the  ringing  of  the  bell  and  that  every  one  that 
make  not  his  personal  appearance  there  and  continue  there 
without  leave  until  the  meeting  be  ended  shall  for  every 
default  pay  twelve  pence  and  if  it  be  not  paid,  the  meeting 
then  to  double  it  and  so  on  until  it  is  paid."  ^  Dor- 
chester followed  in  1633,  ordering  for  the  general  good  and 
well  ordering  of  the  affairs  of  the  plantation  a  "  general 
meeting  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  plantation  at  the  meeting- 
house "  every  Monday  at  eight  o'clock,  "  there  to  settle  and 

1  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  4. 


I08  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [io8 

set  down  such  orders  as  may  tend  to  the  general  good  as 
aforsaid ;  and  every  man  to  be  bound  thereby  without  gain- 
saying or  resistance."  ^ 

The  central  government  sanctioned  this  action  of  the 
local  government,  recognizing  the  town  meeting  as  ia  part 
of  the  government  of  the  colony,  March  3rd,  1635-X  in  the 
following  order,  passed  by  the  General  Court :  "'Whereas 
particular  towns  have  many  things  which  concern  only 
themselves,  and  the  ordering  of  their  own  affairs,  and  dis- 
posing of  business  in  their  own  town,  it  is  therefore  ordered, 
that  the  freemen  of  every  town,  or,  the  major  part  of  them 
shall  only  have  power  to  dispose  of  their  own  lands,  and 
woods,  with  all  these  privileges  and  appurtenances  of  the 
said  towns,  to  grant  lots,  and  to  make  such  orders  as  may 
concern  the  well  ordering  of  their  own  towns  not  repugnant 
to  the  laws  and  orders  here  established  by  the  General  Court ; 
as  also  to  lay  fines  and  penalties  for  the  breach  of  their 
orders,  and  to  levy  and  distrain  the  same  not  exceeding  the 
sum  of  twenty  shillings;  and  also  to  chose  their  own  par- 
ticular officers  as  constables,  surveyors  for  the  highways 
and  the  like." ' 

The  town  meeting,  however,  soon  proved  inadequate  to 
meet  all  the  requirements  of  local  government ;  therefore,  to 
it  were  added  other  governmental  organs, — executive  offi- 
cials who  were  appointed  to  carry  out  the  orders  of  the 
town-meeting  which  still  kept  the  final  authority  in  its  own 
hands.  Of  these  officers  the  most  important  were  the 
townsmen  or  selectmen,  a  body  of  men, — five,  seven,  or  nine, 
— chosen  annually  or  semi-annually  by  the  town-meeting  to 
manage  all  town  affairs.  Their  duties  and  powers,  as  well 
as  those  of  the  other  town  officials,  will  be  discussed  later. 

1  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  3, 

2  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  172. 


109]  TOWN  GOVERNMENT  109 

After  the  formation  of  the  executive  branches  of  govern- 
ment, though  still  keeping  ultimate  authority  in  its  own 
hands,  the  town  meeting  met  less  frequently.  It  held  only 
one  regular  meeting  annually,  that  for  the  election  of  the 
town  officials.  However,  it  actually  met  many  other  times 
during  the  year,  as  it  could  be  called  together  as  often  as 
was  necessary.  The  regular  yearly  meeting  in  Cambridge 
during  the  early  years  of  the  town  was  held  on  the  first 
Monday  in  November,  but  when  the  General  Court  re- 
served the  day  for  the  use  of  the  military  companies,  Cam- 
bridge held  its  town  meeting  on  the  second  Monday  in  No- 
vember.^ Until  October  19,  1652,  Salem  held  its  yearly 
meeting  the  last  week  in  March,  when  the  General  Court 
ordered  it  changed  to  the  second  week  in  that  month,  "  in 
order  to  have  votes  for  magistrates  and  associates  of  county 
court  which  had  lain  over  from  November  to  the  annual 
meetings  of  towns  sooner  confirmed."  Watertown  held  its 
annual  town  meeting  in  the  tenth  month  until  1663  and 
after  that  in  the  ninth  month, — "  ye  first  Monday  of  ninth 
month  annually  there  shall  be  a  public  town-meeting,"  at 
•which  the  "  pastor's  maintenance  shall  be  agreed  upon  and 
a  rate  for  town  charges  (if  any  be  needful)  granted,"  and 
the  officers  chosen.^  Until  1690  Roxbury  held  its  annual 
meeting  in  January  when  the  time  of  meeting  was  changed 
to  the  first  Monday  in  March.  ^ 

Dorchester  decided,  in  1645,  that  the  inhabitants  of  the 
town  should  meet  every  year  on  the  first  second  day  of  the 
tenth  month,  upon  due  notice  from  the  selectmen,  to  elect 
seven  or  more  good  and  prudent  men  to  manage  the  affairs 

^  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  45.  The  general  court  after  1639  kept 
the  first  Monday  of  each  month  for  the  use  of  the  military  company  at 
Boston.     Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  37. 

2  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  78. 

8  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  144. 


no  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [no 

of  the  town  for  the  ensuing  year,  as  well  as  all  other  town 
officers — bailiff,  supervisors  and  raters.  All  such  elections 
were  conducted  in  an  orderly  manner;  the  voting  was  by 
ballot,  and  was  carefully  regulated.  At  this  annual  meet- 
ing changes  were  made  in  the  by-laws  of  the  town,  new 
by-laws  were  made,  and  any  grievances  about  which  com- 
plaint had  been  made  were  redressed.^ 

At  the  annual  meeting  were  elected  townsmen,  constables, 
surveyors  of  highways,  raters,  tithingmen,  cattle  reeves, 
ministers,  school  teachers  and  many  special  officers.  The 
freemen  were  summoned  to  the  meeting  by  a  "  call  for  the 
meeting,"  which  was  "  read  at  the  lecture  before,"  or 
"  posted  on  the  meeting  house  door;"  or  by  a  warning  for 
the  meeting,  which  was  given  "from  house  to  house"  twice 
before  the  meeting  was  held.  ^  Attendance  upon  the  meet- 
ing was  compulsory  and  no  one  could  leave  without  per- 
mission from  the  selectmen.^  In  Watertown,  after  1639, 
any  freeman  who  after  being  sufficiently  warned  stayed 
away  from  any  "  Public  town  meeting  at  the  time  ap- 
pointed "  forfeited  for  every  time  "  to  ye  towne  2s-6d," 
which  fine  was  increased  in  1641  to  5s  for  every  such  of- 
fense. *  Salem,  after  1634,  fined  any  absence  from  town 
meting  i8d: — "all  those  persons  that  shall  not  .  .  .  attend 
town  meetings  either  by  their  persons  or  by  proxy  for  every 
such  offence  after  due  warning  shall  pay  eighteen  pence 
to  be  levied  by  the  constable."  Two-thirds  of  each  fine 
went  to  the  c6nstable  and  one-third  to  the  town.  Reason- 
able excuses  were  accepted. 

^  In  addition  to  the  annual  town-meeting,  many  special 
ones  were  held.     These  were  called  by  the  selectmen,  and 

1  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  289.  "^  Ihid.,  p.  171. 

8  Ihid.,  p.  292. 

♦  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  5. 


Ill]  TOWN  GO VERNMENT  I  j  j 

to  them  the  inhabitants  were  summoned  in  the  same  manner 
as  to  the  annual  meeting.  In  the  call  for  the  meeting  its 
purpose  was  always  mentioned.  The  selectmen  of  Roxbury, 
on  December  lo,  1672,  called  a  town  meeting  to  consult 
about  repairing  the  meeting  house. ^  The  selectmen  of  Cam- 
bridge, on  the  24th  of  the  9th  month,  called  one  to  meet  on 
the  8th  of  the  loth  month  to  discuss  means  for  the  preserva- 
tion of  the  wood  of  the  town,  to  consult  about  the  common 
fences,  and  to  inquire  into  the  "  improvement  of  the  families 
in  spinning  and  clothing."  ^ 

In  every  town,  the  town  meeting  was  probably  presided 
over  by  a  moderator,  who  was  either  one  of  the  selectmen 
chosen  by  that  body  before  the  meeting  to  preside  over  that 
particular  meeting  or  one  of  the  members  of  the  town  meet- 
ing chosen  by  it  after  it  had  assembled.^  "  Watertown,  in 
1667,  ordered  "  that  when  the  selectmen  called  the  town  to- 
gether they  should  appoint  one  of  themselves  as  moderator 
to  carry  on  the  work  &  business  of  the  day." 

In  Salem,  at  least,  and  probably  in  all  towns,  a  quorum 
was  necessary  for  the  transaction  of  business.  The  num- 
ber constituting  this  quorum  was  very  small.  In  1639  it 
was  ordered  by  Salem  that  six  people  should  compose  a 
quorum  of  the  town  meeting  for  the  transaction  of  town 
business ;  "  if  the  whole  town  be  lawfully  warned  and  the 
special  occasion  manifested  together  with  the  warning  which 
has  been  given  a  day  before  the  meeting,  that  it  shall  be  in 
the  power  of  such  as  meet  being  above  the  number  of  six 
persons  to  transact  all  such  occassions  &  make  such  orders 
therein  as  they  shall  judge  meet  &  the  said  orders  &  deter- 
minations to  be  as  authentical  as  if  the  whole  towne  met: 

1  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  82. 

2  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  1 12. 

3  Watertown  Town  Records,  pp.  64,  9.1. 


112  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TO WNS  [112 

provided  the  said  persons  have  been  together  or  have  stayed 
an  hour  after  the  time  first  appointed." 

After  the  meeting  opened, — which  was  done  in  Dor- 
chester by  reading  the  Directory,  which  was  a  set  of  rules 
for  the  guidance  of  the  town  meeting, — the  selectmen  pre- 
sented the  business  of  the  day  to  the  consideration  of  the 
members  present.  Any  question  of  public  interest  could 
be  brought  before  the  meeting,  any  of  the  inhabitants  being 
privileged  to  do  this,  and  opportunity  being  given  to  all  to 
discuss  the  questions  presented.  It  is  probable,  however, 
that  the  selectmen,  knowing  the  purpose  for  which  they  had 
called  the  meeting,  usually  presented  to  the  meeting  the  busi- 
ness which  had  brought  them  together.  They  often  made 
memoranda  of  the  objects  which  they  wished  the  town  meet- 
ing to  consider.  In  Dorchester,  in  1652,  for  example,  the 
selectmen  made  the  following  memorandum :  "  That  we 
call  the  town  together  to  choose  a  Commissioner  to  join  with 
the  selectmen  to  make  a  rate  for  the  country ;"  and  "  that 
the  towne  be  spoken  to  for  Robt.  Stanton's  pay  according 
to  order."  ^  In  Watertown  all  motions  were  read  "  twice 
publicly  and  audibly  "  and  then  voted  upon.  An  exception 
to  this  general  freedom  of  speech  occurred  in  Dorchester  in 
1642,  when  the  selectmen  ordered  that  thereafter  "  no  ques- 
tion could  be  presented  to  the  town  meeting  until  considered 
and  approved  of  by  at  least  two  selectmen."  This  restric- 
tion was  found  necessary,  inasmuch  as  the  confusion  and 
disorder  in  the  town  meeting  caused  by  the  presentation  of 
divers  resolutions  at  once  had  become  unbearable.  Any 
person  who  was  guilty  of  disobedience,  or  of  any  interrup- 
tion of  the  orderly  proceedings  of  the  town  meeting,  was 
thereafter  fined  6d.  But  this  restriction  was  resented  by  the 
town  so  bitterly,  that  in  1645  the  regulation  was  interpreted 

*  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  309. 


113]  TOWN  GO VERNMENT  1 1 3 

to  mean  that,  "  in  case  the  seven  men  should  refuse  to 
propound  any  man's  motion,  he  should  after  some  time 
of  patience  and  forbearance  have  liberty  to  propound  his 
own  cause  for  hearing  at  some  meeting,  provided  all  dis- 
turbance and  confusion  be  avoided."  ^ 

As  this  regulation  suggests,  the  town  meetings  were  not 
always  orderly  gatherings.  In  Dorchester,  especially,  the 
selectmen  had  great  difficulty  in  maintaining  order,  to  ac- 
complish which  they  found  it  necessary  from  time  to  time 
to  pass  very  stringent  rules  for  the  guidance  of  the  meeting. 
The  most  strict  of  these  were  those  passed  in  1645,  by 
which  time  the  confusion  was  so  great  that  some  dras- 
tic measures  were  necessary.  To  redress  the  evils  com- 
plained of,  —  the  heated  arguments,  the  untimely  de- 
parture from  the  meetings,  and  the  presentation  of  ill- 
considered  motions, — the  selectmen  drew  up  the  follow- 
ing orders  which  were  accepted  by  the  town  meeting; 
first,  that  every  man,  when  properly  notified  by  the  select-  ^, 
men  of  the  hour,  must  attend  the  town  meetings  upon 
pain  of  being  fined  six  pence  for  every  absence  unless  an 
excuse  offered  by  him  had  been  accepted  by  the  selectmen; 
second,  that  when  the  meeting  had  begun,  all  should 
attend  to  the  business  before  the  meeting  and  not  gather  in 
groups  of  three  or  four  quarreling  over  that  or  other  mat- 
ters. If  this  were  done,  every  one  should  in  due  time  be 
given  an  opportunity  to  speak,  but  all  motions  must  be  ad- 
dressed to  the  moderator  whom  the  selectmen  would  ap- 
point before  every  meeting;  third,  that  no  motions  should 
be  propounded  unless  they  were  first  submitted  to  the 
selectmen  and  approved  by  them;  and  fourth,  that  no  man 
should  leave  the  meeting  without  giving  due  notice  to  the 
moderator  and  presenting  an  excuse  acceptable  to  him,  upon 
penalty  of  being  fined  twelve  pence.^ 
1  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  293.  2  ijjid,^  p.  293. 


tk 


114  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TO WNS  [  j  i ^ 

There  were  no  restrictions  upon  the  power  of  the 
town  meeting  to  pass  town  ordinances,  except  that  they 
must  not  conflict  with  the  laws  of  the  colony.^  The 
usual  time  for  making  new  town  orders,  as  well  as 
amendments  to  former  ones,  was  at  the  annual  town 
meeting.  Roxbury,  in  1650,  decided  that  the  annual 
orders  drawn  up  by  the  selectmen  and  accepted  by  the 
town  should  be  entered  in  the  town  book  and  should  be 
presented  to  the  ''  body  "  of  the  town  annually  when  the 
town  met  for  the  election  of  officers.  If  the  assembly  ap- 
proved of  these  orders,  they  should  remain  in  force  for  the 
ensuing  year ;  but  if  the  assembly  wished,  it  could  amend  or 
annul  them  at  pleasure,  and  pass  new  ones.^ 

When  we  speak  of  the  government  of  the  seventeenth 

century  towns  being  carried  on  by  a  town  meeting,  we  are 

apt  to  think  that  the  form  of  government  found  there  must 

have  been  as  democratic  as  any  that  the  world  has  seen ; — 

every  inhabitant  apparently  having  an  equal  voice  in  the 

making  of  orders,   the  appropriation  and  expenditure  of 

money,  and  in  the  choice  of  officials.     But  this  was  far  from 

being  the  case.     On  the  contrary,  comparatively  few  of  the 

inhabitants  of  these  towns  had  any  share  in  its  government. 

/Only  those  inhabitants  who  were  freemen, — that  is,  members 

I  in  good  and  regular  standing  of  a  duly  recognized  church, — 

I  were  considered  citizens  of  the  colony  and  town  and  as 

\such  allowed  to  vote.     The  other  inhabitants  of  the  town, 

— the  non-freemen, — could  attend  the  meetings  called  to 

settle  town  afifairs,  and  could  discuss  all  question,  but  could 

not  vote  except  in  certain  specified  instances.     Hence,  the 

towns  were  in  the  habit  of  holding  two  different  meetings, 

one  composed  of  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  town  and  the 

other  of  freemen  only.     The  difference  in  the  nature  and 

1  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  172.         2  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  82. 


115]  TOWN  GOVERNMENT  II5 

duties  of  these  town  meetings  is  shown  by  the  call  issued  for 
a  meeting  in  Dorchester  in  1669:  "It  is  ordered  that  a 
warrant  should  be  issued  out  to  the  constable  to  warn  a 
meeting  of  the  freemen  to  meet  the  last  week  in  March  to 
bring  in  votes  for  nomination  of  magistrates  and  to  choose 
deputies  and  commissioners ;  and  the  rest  of  the  inhabitants 
also  to  choose  constables  and  county  Treasurer  and  other 
business  that  may  be  done." 

And  again,  in  1670  and  1672,  the  warrant  for  the  meeting 
reads ;  "  for  the  freemen  to  meet  .  .  .  to  bring  in  votes  for 
the  nomination  of  Magistrates  and  County  Treasurer  "  * 
and  for  the  other  inhabitants  "  to  vote  on  other  business."  ' 
It  is  probable  that  the  freemen  of  the  town  met  at  an  earlier 
hour  than  the  non-freemen,  who  joined  them  when  it  came 
time  to  take  up  town  business.  In  1672  the  freemen  of 
Dorchester  met  at  ten  o'clock  in  the  morning,  and  the  in- 
habitants joined  them  about  twelve.  '*  The  same  day  it 
was  agreed  that  the  Constables  should  give  notice  to  the 
freemen  to  bring  in  their  votes  for  the  nomination  of  magis- 
trates and  for  the  choice  of  other  officers  as  shall  then  be 
done  on  the  14th  of  March  by  ten  of  the  clock,  and  the  in- 
habitants to  meet  about  twelve  of  the  clock  to  give  their 
approbation  or  dislike  of  the  place  pitched  upon  by  the 
committee  for  the  meeting-house  on  Rock  Hill."  *  In 
Salem,  whenever  the  election  of  a  deputy  to  the  general 
court  is  mentioned,  the  record  reads  "  a  town  meeting  of  the 
freemen ;"  ''  while  the  records  of  town  meetings  called  for 
local  affairs  read,  "  a  general  town  meeting  of  freemen  and 
townsmen."  The  different  character  of  the  town  meetings 
is  also  shown  by  an  order  of  the  town,  made  in  1649,  when 

1  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  163.  2  IJjid.,  p.  183. 

8  Ibid.,  p  .190.  *  Ihid.,  p.  190. 

^  Salem  Town  Records,  pp.  142,  183,  198. 


Il6  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [ii6 

it  was  decreed  that  a  warning  by  the  constable  on  lecture 
day  should  be  legal  warning  for  "  all  public  meetings  that 
concerned  the  town  in  general  or  the  freemen  of  the  town.^ 
The  two  meetings — the  "  general  town  meeting,"  and  the 
"  town  meeting  of  the  freemen  " — are  spoken  of  through- 
out the  Salem  records.  Cambridge  decided  in  1656,  that 
only  "  free  inhabitants  could  nominate  and  elect  magistrates, 
county  treasurer  and  deputy  to  the  general  court,"  ^  these 
being  the  powers  usually  conferred  upon  the  town  meeting 
of  the  freemen  by  all  the  towns.  Cambridge  also  ordered 
in  1656,  "by  a  joint  vote  of  the  town,"  that  thereafter 
there  should  be  annually  two  regular  town  meetings :  the  one, 
"  the  second  Monday  in  March,  by  nine  of  the  clock  in  the 
morning  .  .  .  for  the  bringing  in  of  votes  by  ye  fremen 
of  this  town  for  ye  nomination  of  magistrates,  choice  of 
County  Treasurer,  and  a  choice  of  deputies  for  the  General 
Court ;"  and  the  second,  "  the  second  Monday  in  Novem- 
ber at  ye  aforesaid  time  in  the  morning  .  .  .  for  election 
of  all  town  officers."  ^ 

A  law  of  the  colony  allowed  non-freemen  to  attend  any 
town  meeting  and  to  speak  in  favor  of  or  against  any  mo- 
tion and,  after  1647,  permitted  them  to  be  jurymen  and  to 
vote  for  selectmen,  and  on  other  town  business,  provided  the 
majority  of  the  selectmen  were  frequent;  but  the  towns  evi- 
dently did  not  summon  them  to  the  town  meetings  devoted 
to  the  discussid^ /^f  questions  upon  which  they  were  not 
allowed  to  vote. 

The  most  important  of  all  the  town  officials  were  the 
selectmen,  who  wiere  elected  by  the  inhabitants  of  the  town, 
"  to  do  the  whcie  business  of  the  town,  whatsoever  they 
might  do,  to  stjlnd  in  as  full  force  as  if  the  whole  town 

*  Salem  Town  Records,  p.  168. 

2  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  112.  ^  Ibid. 


II y]  TOWN  GO VERNMENT  1 1 7 

did  the  same,  even  for  making  of  new  orders  or  altering 
of  old."  ^  They  were  usually  elected  for  the  term  of  one 
year,  but  could  be  re-elected  indefinitely.  Dorchester  and 
Salem,  in  their  earliest  years,  elected  their  selectmen  every 
six  months,^  but  soon  changed  the  length  of  the  term  to  one 
year.  The  number  elected  varied,  but,  by  the  end  of  the 
century,  had  become  seven  in  nearly  all  the  town.  Of  this 
number  five  were  usually  the  selectmen  proper  and  the  other 
two  the  constables,  who  were  a  recognized  part  of  the  board 
of  selectmen.  Cambridge  began  by  choosing  seven  select- 
men; then,  in  1635,  it  elected  nine — probably  adding  to  the 
original  seven  the  two  constables — but  the  next  year  re- 
turned to  seven,  five  selectmen  and  two  constables.^  Water- 
town  chose  at  first  eleven,*  then  twelve,*^  and  nine,  and  fin- 
ally seven.  Salem,  also,  began  with  a  large  number, — 
thirteen, — and  afterwards  varied  between  seven,  five,  and, 
finally,  seven. ^  Dorchester  had  twelve,  and  then  nine,^ 
then  five,  with  whom  the  two  constables  were  joined,  mak- 
ing the  usual  number  seven.®  Roxbury,  on  the  other  hand, 
always  speaks  of  her  "five  men."  , ,  .     '-^'■"' 

I  At  first,  the  powers  and  duties  of  the  selectnien  were 

Aw^  rather  indefinite,  but  the  towns  gradually  defined  them 
\^' ^f'  \  clearly  and  distintcly.  Cambridge,  on  October  4,  1652,  de- 
clared that  they  were  to  carry  out  the  orders  of  the  court 
laid  upon  the  town;  that  they  were  to  give  public  notice 

1  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  11. 
^Dorchester  Town  Records,  pp.  13,  47. 
3  Cambridge  Town  Records,  pp.  36,  99,  loi. 
■*  Watertown  Town  Records,  pp.  i,  4,  13. 
6  Ibid.,  pp.  5,  7. 

*  Salem  Town  Records,  p.  137. 
"^  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  13. 
8  Ibid.,  p.  213. 


ii8 


EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS 


[Il8 


^ 


of  all  the  meetings  of  the  inhabitants;  and  to  faithfully 
carry  out  whatever  might  be  determined  upon  by  the  town ; 
that  they  were  to  prevent  and  remove  any  damage  that  they 
thought  might  have  become  a  burden  through  "  any  per- 
son taking   more  than   his   share   in   the   common   lands, 
woods,  or  other  public  stocks,  liberties,  or  interest  of  the 
town  ;"1  that  they  were  to  portion  an  equal  rate  among  the 
mhabitants  of  the  town  necessary  to  carry  into  effect  these 
laws,  which  rate  was  to  be  levied  by  the  constables  on  all 
^  the   inhabitants.*       Dorchester,   in    1645,   g^^ve  them   full 
power  and  liberty  to  order  all  the  prudential  affairs  within 
the  town  of  Dorchester,  with  these  limitations;  first,  that 
they  should  not  meddle  with  the  giving  or  disposing  of  any 
of  the  town  land  without  the  consent  and  good  will  of  the 
town  first  obtained;  and,  second,  that  they  should  not  take 
upon  them  to  alter  any  parcel  of  land  from  the  present 
ownership,  without  the  consent  of  the  proprietors.  f^Wver- 
theless]  tji^  should  have .  alL.accustoniedJibexty  in  regu- 
lating  comnion   lands    in   fence   and   also   the   town   lots 
and  they  should  have  power  to  enjoin  the  several  proprie- 
tdrsTolnake  and  repair  their  fences  in  proportion,  and  upon 
i  default  therein  to  charge  such  penalty  upon  th^m  as  they 
\  should  see  meet.     They  should  order  the  ringing  and  yok- 
.  i  ing  of  hogs,  the  keeping  of  the  cows  in  the  pen,  stinting 
\  I  the  cow-walk,  bS^ring  the  woods  in  season,  and  the  regulat- 
\    ing  ofTHe^  rommQn  \"  as  concerns  the  wood  and  timber ;" 
they  should  faithfully  and  prudently  oversee  all  the  business 
of  the  town  that  was  committed  to  them  and  carefully  and 
peaceably  execute  it  and  they  should  take  care  of  all  inferior*^ 
officers,  seeing  that  they  discharged  their  places  faith^fullj^i 
and  should  take  account  from  them  and  make  faithful  and 
punctual  record  in  their  town  book  so  that  satisfaction  might 


*  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  100. 


119]  TOWN  GOVERNMENT  u^; 

be  given  in  any  doubt  upon  demand,  and,  also,  that  all  de- 
linquencies and  mistakes  in  rates  taxed  upon  the  town  by 
the  General  Court  or  otherwise  might  be  discharged;  they 
should  "  tenderly  and  prudently  "  provide  that  all  abuses 
in  the  disorderly  jarring  of  the  meetings  and  the  intemper- 
ate clashing  and  hasty,  indigested,  and  rash  votes  might 
be  prevented  by  requiring  that  motions  of  any  importance 
should  be  first  drawn  up  in  writing  and  then  deliberately 
published  two  or  three  times  and  then  discussed ;  they  should 
be  careful  to  meet  eight  times  in  the  year,  viz. : — the  second 
Monday  of  every  month  in  the  year  except  in  the  second, 
fifth,  sixth  and  eighth  months  at  some  place  known  unto  all 
the  town  and  they  should  hold  their  meeting  from  nine 
o'clock  in  the  forenoon  to  three  o'clock  in  the  afternoon,  so 
that  "  all  such  as  had  any  complaints  or  requests  to  make  or 
any  information  to  give  or  anything  whatsoever  to  do 
with  them  should  certainly  find  all  or  five  of  them  at  the 
least."  Failure  to  do  this  should  be  punished  by  a  fine  and 
also  by  loss  of  position  if  good  excuse  could  not  be  given. 
Finally,  they  should  receive  all  complaints,  requests,  or  in- 
formations and  "speedily  and  seasonably  apply  themselves  to 
issue  all  such  business  in  a  fair,  peaceable,  and  quiet  manner 
and  thereof  to  make  a  fair  and  plain  record  in  the  town 
book."  For  the  encouragement  of  the  selectmen  it  was 
agreed  that  it  should  not  be  lawful  for  "  any  one  of  Dor- 
chester to  slight  either  the  persons  or  order  of  the  seven 
men'  for  the  time  being  but  that  all  their  orders  for  pru- 
dential order  should  stand  ratified  by  this  power  given  them, 
and  whosoever  should  refuse  to  obey  either  them  or  their 
orders  should  be  punished."  The  freemen  of  Dorchester 
agreed  to  these  regulations  and  promised  to  keep  them  in- 
violable, to  that  end  appointing  a  certain  John  Wiswall 
"  to  record  the  same  to  be  a  rule  for  them  and  their  sue- 


I20  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [120 

cessors  except  God  should  put  into  our  or  their  hearts  some 
more  profitable  and  prudent  way."  ^ 

In  Salem  selectmen  are  not  mentioned  until  1635,  but, 
as  the  town  records  do  not  begin  until  1634,  and,  as  the  first 
record  speaking  of  selectmen  is  a  statement  of  some  trans- 
action of  theirs  and  not  of  their  election,  it  seems  probable 
that  Salem  elected  selectmen  before  this  date.  The  next 
entry  mentioning  them  is  in  1636,  but  there  is  no  mention  of 
their  election  until  1637.  On  the  19th  of  the  fourth  month 
of  that  year  the  town  in  general  voted,  '*  that  men  should  be 
chosen  for  managing  the  affairs  of  the  town."  Twelve 
men  were  then  elected,  one  of  whom  was  appointed  to  "  en- 
ter all  the  orders  that  the  twelve  shall  make  for  the  town, 
gratis."  Their  term  of  office  was  six  months.  No  other 
election  is  mentioned  until  1638,  in  which  year  at  a  general 
town-meeting  "  seven  men  were  chosen  for  a  twelfth 
month."  This  number  was  elected  annually  until  1657, 
when  only  five  were  elected.^  Salem  seems  to  have  given 
its  magistrate  the  power  of  acting  with  the  selectmen.  This 
was  true,  at  least  until  1640,  for  the  town  then  ordered 
that  six  selectmen  without  a  magistrate,  or  any  four 
with  one,  "  might  do  any  thing  or  act  and  had  power 
to  do  as  fully  as  if  all  were  together."  After  1640 
the  requirement  about  the  magistrate's  acting  with  the 
four  selectmen  was  withdrawn.  It  was  then  agreed 
that,  "  what  grants  or  other  orders  have  been  made 
by  the  greatest  part  of  the  seven  men  that  they  shall  stand 
firm." 

Watertown  chose  selectmen  for  the  first  time  on  August 
23,  1634,  when  it  was  agreed  by  the  consent  of  the  freemen 
that  there  should  be  chosen  three  persons  to  see  to  the  "or- 

*  Dorchester  Town  Records,  pp.  290,  291. 
2  Salem  Town  Records,  p.  137. 


121  ]  TOWN  GOVERNMENT  121 

dering  of  the  civil  affairs  in  the  town,  one  of  them  to  serve 
as  town  clerk,  who  should  keep  the  records  and  acts  of  the 
Town."  ^  This  number  was  enlarged  the  following  year 
to  eleven,  which  number  was  chosen  annually  until  1639; 
then  twelve  were  chosen,  seven  of  whom  "  could  make  any 
order."  ^  In  1648  the  number  dropped  to  nine,  and,  in 
1647,  to  seven,  which  number  was  chosen  annually  there- 
after. 

Selectmen  may  have  been  chosen  in  Dorchester  as  early 
as  1633.  This  seems  probable  as,  in  an  order  made  in  1634 
for  the  election  of  ten  men  to  order  all  the  affairs  of  the  plan- 
tation, all  the  inhabitants  were  required  "  to  stand  bound  by 
the  orders  so  made  as  aforesaid  according  to  the  scope  of  a 
former  order  in  May  nth,  163 1."  ^  On  Monday,  October 
8th,  1633,  their  election  is  specifically  mentioned.  The 
town  then  ordered  that  twelve  men  should  be  chosen  to 
join  with  the  inhabitants  "  to  settle  such  orders  as  may 
tend  to  the  general  good;"  and,  on  October  28th,  1634,  the 
men  thus  chosen — ten  in  number — were  set  aside  from  the 
town  meeting  and  given  specific  duties  as  follows : — "  It 
is  agreed  that  there  shall  be  ten  men  chosen  to  order  all  the 
affairs  of  the  plantation,  to  continue  for  one  year  and  to 
meet  monthly  according  to  the  order  October  8,  1633,  and 
no  order  to  be  established  without  seven  of  them  at  the  least 
and  concluded  by  the  major  part  of  these  seven  of  them,  and 
all  the  inhabitants  to  be  bound  by  the  orders  so  made."  ^ 

Selectmen  are  mentioned  on  the  first  page  of  the  Roxbury 
town  records,  but  as  that  is  an  undated  record,  it  is  impos- 
sible to  tell  when  they  were  first  chosen.  This  record  men- 
tions the  election  of  five  and  states  that  they  were  chosen 

1  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  i. 
^Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  7. 
8  Ibid. 


122  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [122 

"  to  order  town  affairs  for  ye  year  ensuing."  They  were 
elected  by  "  papers/'  and  had  "  full  power  to  make  and  exe- 
cute such  orders  as  they  in  their  apprehension  should  think 
to  be  conducing  to  ye  best  good  of  ye  town."  ^ 

The  selectmen  were  required  by  town  ordinances  to  at- 
tend the  regular  monthly  meetings  of  that  body.  Water- 
town,  in  1639,  declared  that  "  any  freeman  deputed  to  or- 
der the  civil  affairs  of  the  town  "  who  absented  himself 
from  the  place  of  meeting  should  be  fined  2s-6d.^  Dor- 
chester required  promptness  in  addition  to  regularity  of  at- 
tendance, imposing  a  fine  of  6d. — later  I2d. — for  arrival  at 
any  meeting  after  8  A.  M.,  I2d.  for  arrival  after  noon  and 
2s.  for  non-attendance.'  Salem,  in  1634,  ordered  its  select- 
men to  meet  on  the  second  day  of  the  week  monthly,  "  upon 
the  penalty  of  ten  shillings  to  be  levied  on  the  whole  or 
upon  such  as  are  absent  without  just  grounds."  Cambridge 
not  only  fined  for  absence,  but,  after  1648,  decreed  that  any 
one  not  present  within  half  an  hour  of  the  ringing  of  the 
bell  (11 130)  not  only  lost  his  dinner, — an  "  eight-penny  or- 
dinary "  provided  by  the  town  for  the  selectmen — but  was, 
in  addition,  compelled  to  pay  to  those  present  a  pint  of  sack 
or  its  equivalent.* 

The  selectmen  were  more  than  mere  executive  officials. 
Just  as  important  as  the  execution  of  orders  given  them 
by  the  town  were  their  other  functions.  These  were  both 
legislative  and  judicial  in  character.  Many  of  their  meet- 
ings seem  like  police  courts,  while  others  resemble  almost  as 
closely  the  meetings  of  a  legislative  body, — subject,  of 
course,  to  the  control  of  the  town  meeting.     The  select- 

^  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  i 

*  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  5. 
^Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  8. 

*  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  78. 


123]  TOH^N  GOVERNMENT  123 

men  made  new  town  orders  and  altered  old  ones.  In  Water- 
town,  in  1666,  they  ordered  that  the  constables  should 
"yearly  clear  their  accounts  with  the  town  for  all  sums  com- 
mitted to  them  to  gather;  "^  and,  in  1669,  they  ordered  that 
thereafter  only  three  herds  could  be  kept  in  the  town,  and 
limited  the  range  of  each.^  In  Dorchester  they  ordered  that 
no  inhabitant  of  the  town  should  mow  any  grass  in  salt 
or  fresh  marsh  before  the  last  of  the  fifth  month,^  and  also 
that  owners  of  all  horses  must  "  set  an  ear  mark  upon  his 
or  their  beast "  and  have  it  recorded.*  In  Cambridge  they 
forbade  the  cutting  down  of  trees,^  and  made  the  order  that 
"  who  ever  turns  any  sheep  into  our  common,  that  is  not 
an  inhabitant  of  the  town,  shall  pay  five  shillings  a  head  for 
the  summer  feed  thereof."  ^  In  Roxbury,  in  1672,  they  or- 
dered that  no  stranger  could  be  admitted  into  any  family 
for  more  than  one  week  unless  permission  was  given  by  the 
selectmen.'' 

All  acts  of  the  selectmen,  however,  were  subject  to  re- 
vision or  rejection  by  the  town  meeting.  Dorchester  pro- 
vided for  this  supervision  by  a  town  ordinance  passed  in 
1636,  that  "  all  acts  decided  upon  by  the  major  part  of  those 
present,  which  be  seven  at  least,"  must  be  "  upon  the  next 
lecture  day  after  lecture  read  to  the  company  of  freemen 
who  are  to  be  warned  ...  to  stay.  And  then  all  acts  and  con- 
clusions as  shall  not  be  contradicted  by  the  major  part  of  the 
freemen  present  shall  stand  for  orders  and  bind  the  planta- 
tion and  every  inhabitant  thereof."  ®  While  none  of  the 
other  towns  passed  similar  orders,  all  exercised  the  power 

*  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  89.  ^  IJjid.^  p.  94. 

3  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  50.  *  Ibid.,  p.  208. 

^Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  114.  ^  Ibid.,  p.  130. 

'  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  y2. 

*  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  21. 


124  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [124 

of  annulling  any  ordinance  passed  by  the  selectmen.  Cam- 
bridge, for  instance,  refused  to  allow  the  selectmen  the  power 
of  admitting  new  inhabitants.  This  the  selectmen  had  de- 
cided to  be  their  prerogative,  but  the  town  meeting  put  it 
on  record  that  the  selectmen  could  possess  no  such  power,  for 
no  one  could  admit  new  inhabitants  but  the  "  free  Inhabit- 
ants of  ye  towne."  ^  The  town  meeting  of  Watertown,  in 
1667,  "  declared  by  vote  that  they  would  not  alter  what  the 
selectmen  had  done  about  the  sale  of  the  land  ...  or  about 
the  bridge  at  the  mill," — implying  that  they  had  power  to  do 
80.^  But  orders  passed  by  the  selectmen,  unless  expressly 
repealed  by  the  town,  were  as  binding  upon  all  the  inhabit- 
ants as  if  passed  by  the  town  meeting  itself.  In  1645  Dor- 
chester stated  this  in  the  meeting  of  the  town : — "  it  shall 
not  be  lawful  for  any  of  Dorchester  whatsoever  to  slight 
either  the  persons  or  orders  of  the  seven  men  for  the  time 
being  but  that  all  their  orders  for  prudential  order  shall 
stand  ratified  from  the  liberty  afore  given."  ^ 

The  town  meeting  not  only  supervised  and  confirmed  or 
annulled  the  acts  of  the  selectmen,  but  it  also  called  to  their 
attention  certain  things  which  they  should  do  for  the  benefit 
of  the  town.  Salem,  in  1657,  ordered  its  selectmen  not  to 
receive  strangers  within  the  town  unless  the  town's  consent 
was  asked  and  given,  and  "  to  take  care  to  pay  such  neces- 
saries for  the  entertainment  of  Mr.  Whitney  until  further 
orders."  Roxbury,  in  1654,  took  from  the  selectmen  the 
authority  to  grant  permission  to  anyone  to  "  lapp  or  girdle 
any  of  the  trees  in  the  common,"  and,  January  15th,  1665, 
took  the  unusual  step  of  appointing  three  men  "  to  give  the 

1  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  121. 

2  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  92. 

'  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  291. 


125]  TOWN  GOVERNMENT  125 

selectmen  orders  that  might  be  thought  of  by  them  for  the 
selectmen  to  consider  of  and  establish  for  the  good  of  the 
town."^  Cambridge,  in  1652,  appointed  five  men  to  "draw 
up  instructions  for  the  townsmen  and  present  the  same  to 
the  Towne."  ^  Watertown,  in  1679,  ordered  its  selectmen 
"  to  procure  two  hundred  copies  of  those  several  laws  re- 
specting the  work  of  the  tithingmen  and  their  work  which 
the  law  requires  of  them,"  and  to  distribute  them  "  for  ye 
several  inhabitants'  use."  ^  Dorchester  ordered  its  selectmen 
"  to  persecute  the  trial  "  to  "  get  Tomson's  Island  for  the 
town  of  Dorchester."  * 

It  was  not  customary  to  pay  the  selectmen  for  the  time 
they  spent  in  the  service  of  the  town.  Roxbury  seems  to  be 
the  only  town  that  did  so.  There,  on  January  15,  1665,  in 
"  a  full  town  meeting  "  before  the  selectmen  were  chosen 
there  was  a  vote  past  that  they  would  allow  the  five  men 
toward  their  loss  of  time  and  expense  five  pounds  a  year. 
This  was  not  paid  in  a  lump  sum  but  in  instalments, — dur- 
ing 168 1  at  one  time  six  shillings,  at  another  fifteen,  and  at 
a  third  one  pound  two  shillings.'^  This  salary  was  later  re- 
duced to  fifty  shillings  per  year,  and,  in  1679,  was  with- 
drawn altogether.®  Dorchester,  while  allowing  the  select- 
men no  salary,  paid  their  expenses.  Among  the  items  men- 
tioned by  the  constable  in  returning  an  account  of  the  town 
rate  for  1662  is  this: — "part  of  selectmen's  expenses  i£- 
oos-ood."  ^  This  town  also  allowed  them  twelve  pence 
apiece  for  their  dinners  at  the  ordinary.® 

1  Roxbury  Town  Records,  pp.  13,  57. 

2  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  99. 

8  Watertown  Town  Records;  p.  144. 

■*  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  96. 

^  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  57.  ®  Ibid.,  pp.  68,  94. 

"^Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  116.  ^  Ibid.,  p.  291. 


126  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [126 

Cambridge  provided  for  them  "  an  eight  peny  ordinary 
— vppon  their  meeting  day,"  paid  for  out  of  the  town  rate.^ 

The  town  officials  who  stood  next  in  importance  to  the 
selectmen  were  the  constables,  two  of  whom  are  found  in 
every  town.  Their  powers  and  duties,  as  defined  by  the  Gen- 
eral Court  in  1634,  were,  first,  to  set  forth  the  "  hue  and 
cry  "  after  murderers  and  all  criminals,  if  no  magistrate 
were  near;  second,  to  apprehend  without  warrant  all  va- 
grants and  persons  overtaken  with  drink,  who  were  caught 
swearing,  breaking  the  Sabbath,  or  lying,  provided  they 
were  taken  in  their  crime  in  the  "  sight  of  the  con- 
stables or  by  present  information  from  others."  All 
persons  were  commanded  to  assist  them  in  the  dis- 
charge of  their  duty  and  could  be  fined  for  neglecting 
to  do  so.  In  entering  upon  their  office  they  took  an  oath  be- 
fore the  magistrate,^ — probably  one  very  similar  to  the  one 
prescribed  by  the  General  Court : — "  you  do  here  swear  by 
the  great  name  of  Almighty  God,  that  you  will  carefully  in- 
tend the  preservation  of  the  peace,  the  discovery  and  pre- 
venting all  attempts  against  the  same;  you  shall  duly  exe- 
cute all  warrents  which  shall  be  sent  unto  you  from  lawful! 
authority  here  established,  and  shall  faithfully  execute  all 
such  orders  of  court  as  are  committed  to  your  care,  and  in 
all  things  you  shall  deal  seriously  and  faithfully  while  you 
shall  be  in  office  without  any  sinister  respect  of  favor  or 
displeasure."  ^ 

In  addition  to  the  financial  duties  connected  with  the 
constable's  office,  which  have  been  discussed  in  the  chapter  on 
finance,  and  to  those  assigned  to  the  constables  by  the  General 
Court,  they  were  called  upon  apparently  to  do  anything  that 

^  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  78. 
2  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  139. 
'  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  252. 


127]  TOWN  GOVERNMENT  I27 

the  town  or  selectmen  wished  done.  For  example,  they  gave 
notice  of  the  town  meetings, — sometimes  by  announcing 
them  on  the  Sunday  preceding  in  the  meeting  house,  some- 
times by  going  from  door  to  door ;  they  enforced  ordinances 
passed  by  the  town  meeting  or  by  the  selectmen;  they 
served  all  warrants  from  the  selectmen,^  and  attended  their 
meetings  to  perform  "  such  services  as  they  had  for  them;"  ^ 
they  took  charge  of  boys  on  the  Sabbath  day ;  they  looked 
after  the  repairs  of  the  meeting  house,  school  house, 
and  bridges;^  and,  in  1637,  Cambridge  considered  it  their 
duty  to  survey  new  lands.* 

In  order  that  no  man  might  be  able  to  plead  ignorance 
when  a  constable  required  his  assistance,  it  was  necessary  to 
provide  these  officials  with  a  badge  of  office  to  distinguish 
them  from  other  men.  The  General  Court,  therefore,  or- 
dered that  the  towns  should  provide  every  constable  with  a 
staff  as  a  sign  of  his  office,  which  staff  he  should  take  when- 
ever he  went  forth  to  discharge  "  any  part  of  his  office." 
This  staff  was  ''  black  and  about  some  five -foot,  or  five  &  a 
half  foot  long,  being  tipped  at  ye  upper  end  five  or  six  inches 
with  brass."  ^ 

The  constables  were  paid  officials.  In  Watertown  they 
had  a  fixed  salary  of  two  pounds  per  year  and,  in  addition, 
fees  for  certain  duties.  In  1667  they  were  allowed  by  the 
town  one  shilling  for  "  taking  distress  for  rates  or  fines," 
and  also  "  all  just  damage  for  any  transporting  of  rates  or 
fines  "  to  places  where  they  should  have  been  paid.  In 
Cambridge  they  were  paid  out  of  the  town  rate,  in  1676, 
fifty  shillings,  two-thirds  of  which  went  to  the  town  con- 
stables and  the  other  third  was  divided  between  the  two 

^  Mass.  Arch.,  vol.  39,  p.  410.         '^Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  187. 
^Cambridge  Town  Records,  pp.  112,  173.  *  *  Ibid.,  p.  29. 

5  Ibid.,  p.  351- 


128  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [128 

country  constables.  In  Dorchester  they  were  paid  by  re- 
ceiving a  certain  fee  levied  in  proportion  to  the  offence.  In 
1670  it  was  ordered,  "  that  whereas  Constable  Thomas 
Davenport  had  taken  a  gun  of  Joseph  Long's  for  a  fine  for 
his  defective  fence  at  the  great  lots  that  he  should  deliver 
him  his  gun  again  upon  payment  of  six  shillings  besides  the 
Constable's  fee."  ' 

The  regular  term  of  office  for  the  constables  was  one  year. 
They  were  elected  at  the  annual  town  meeting,  when  the 
other  town  officials  were  chosen.  It  was  customary  to  have 
two  of  those  officers  in  each  town,  but  there  are  some  excep- 
tions to  this.  In  Salem,  until  1655,  it  is  difficult  to  tell  how 
many  there  were.  Only  one  was  elected  at  any  town  meet- 
ing, but  at  successive  town  meetings  during  any  one  year, 
different  constables  were  elected  without  any  apparent  va- 
cancy having  occurred  since  the  last  election.  For  instance, 
in  1645,  Henry  Harwood  was  chosen  constable  in  the  second 
month,  Michael  Schaflin  in  the  eleventh  month  and  Jeffry 
Massy  in  the  twelfth;  in  1665,  the  town  meeting  chose  two 
constables  for  Salem  and  one  for  "  Cape  Anne  Syde,"  but 
in  1657  only  one  for  the  town,  one  for  Cape  Anne  Syde  " 
and  one  for  the  "  Lots  and  farms."  In  Cambridge  there 
were  at  first  two  constables  but,  as  the  town  grew,  the  num- 
ber was  increased  to  four, — two  for  the  town,  one  for  the 
farms,  and  one  for  the  village.  In  Watertown  there  were 
only  two  and  in  Dorchester  two.^  There  is  an  unusual  item 
about  the  constables  in  the  Dorchester  records  for  1663-4, — 
"it  was  voted,  .that  Thomas  Bird  should  be  exempted  from 
being  chosen  as  constable  for  Dorchester,  for  the  space  of 
seven  years  ensuing,  in  regard  of  much  trouble  and  losses 
he  sustained  in  the  year  when  he  was  bailiff,  which  he  was 
contented  to  remit  to  the  Town."  ^ 

1  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  168.  2  j^id,  pp.  164,  170,  174. 

^  Ibid.,  p.  119. 


129]  TOWN  GOVERNMENT  1 29 

Of  the  minor  town  officials,  the  tithingman  is  perhaps 
the  best  known.  His  duties  were  very  varied  in  nature : — 
to  preserve  order  in  the  meeting-house,  to  see  that  every 
one  went  to  church,  to  stop  all  unnecessary  riding  and  driv- 
ing on  Sunday,  to  inspect  all  licensed  inns,  and,  in  all  re- 
spects, to  guard  the  public  morals.^  This  official  does  not 
appear  in  the  early  years  of  the  town.  The  office  was 
created  by  the  General  Court,  October  31,  1679,  when  the 
towns  were  ordered  to  choose  tithingmen  annually  from 
the  "  most  prudent  and  discreet  inhabitants,"  and  to  swear 
them  in  before  a  magistrate  or  a  commissioner  of  small 
causes  or,  where  there  was  neither  of  these  officials,  before 
the  selectmen.^  Tithingmen  are  not  mentioned  in  Cam- 
bridge until  1683,  but  then  the  selectmen  chose  ten, — three 
for  the  town,  three  for  the  common,  two  for  the  south 
side  of  the  river,  and  two  for  the  farms.  However,  after 
this  date,  Cambridge  elected  its  tithingmen  annually  in  town- 
meeting  for  a  term  of  one  year.  Their  numbers  varied, 
sometimes  decreasing  to  eight,  as  in  1694,  and  sometimes 
being  increased  by  the  addition  of  one  elected  for  a  special 
place,  as  in  1698  "  for  ye  lane  to  Watertown  "  and  "  for  ye 
Plaine."     By  1700  their  number  had  increased  to  seventeen. 

In  Salem  tithingmen  are  not  mentioned  until  1677,  when 
twenty-five  were  appointed  by  the  town;  in  Watertown, 
tithingmen  are  mentioned  in  the  year  1677-78;  in  Roxbury, 
in  1679,  when  the  selectmen  chose  ten  for  the  ensuing  year. 
Apparently  the  selectmen  always  chose  them  in  Roxbury 
for  their  doing  so  is  recorded  in  1680,  1682,  and  1683.' 
Before  the  creation  of  this  office,  the  same  duties  had  been 
performed  by  men  chosen   for  that  purpose.     Salem,   as 

^Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  pp.  155,  329. 

^  Mass.  Arch.,  vol.  112,  pp.  309-312. 

8  Roxbury  Town  Records,  pp.  95,  100,  10^. 


I30  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [130 

early  as  1664,  appointed  men  "  to  walk  .  ,  .  every  Lord's  day 
in  the  time  of  God's  worship  to  take  notice  of  such  as  either 
lie  about  the  meeting-house  without  attending  to  the  word 
or  ordinances,  or  that  lie  at  home  or  in  the  fields."  ^  Dor- 
chester laid  an  additional  duty  upon  its  tithingmen  in  1678. 
The  selectmen  of  that  year  ordered  them,  ''  to  inspect  all 
inmates  that  do  come  into  each  of  their  precincts,  either 
single  persons  or  families  and  to  give  speedy  information 
therof  unto  the  selectmen  from  time  to  time  or  to  some  of 
them  that  order  may  be  taken  about  them."  ^ 

Other  town  officers  were  the  surveyors  of  the  highways, 
the  raters,  the  drummer,  the  bell  ringer  and  sexton,  and  the 
cattle,  swine  and  goat  reeves.  In  Salem  the  duties  of 
each  of  the  minor  officers  were  carefully  specified,  and  it  is 
probable  that  each  performed  similar  duties  in  the  other 
towns.  The  drummer  was  ordered,  "  to  beat  the  drum  for 
their  train  band  whenever  they  needed  him,"  receiving  for 
each  training  day  sixteen  shillings.  The  sexton  was  also 
the  bell-ringer  and  the  grave  digger,  for  the  latter  office 
being  paid  in  Salem  eighteen  pence  "  per  grave  for 
digging."  « 

The  surveyors  of  highways  were  among  the  most  im- 
portant of  the  minor  town  official,  but  their  duties  and 
method  of  election  have  been  discussed  in  the  chapter  on 
the  town  land. 

In  Dorchester  an  officers  is  mentioned  who  seems  pecu- 
liar to  that  town.  This  is  the  bailiff.  His  duties,  as  they 
were  prescribed  in  1635,  were  very  similar  to  those  per- 
formed by  the  constables : — "  He  shall  levy  all  rates,  fines 
or  emercements  for  the  plantation  by  impounding  the  of- 

1  Salem  Town  Records,  p.  130. 

2  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  223. 

«  Felt,  Annuals  of  Salem,  vol.  i,  p.  335. 


131  ]  TOWN  GOVERNMENT  I3I 

fendor's  goods,  and  there  to  detain  them  till  satisfaction  be 
made,  and  if  the  owner  of  the  goods,  do  not  make  satis- 
faction within  four  days,  it  shall  be  lawful  for  him  to  sell 
the  goods  and  return  the  over-plus  to  the  party  offending, 
and  be  allowed  twelve  pence  for  every  distress."  ^  Only  one 
bailiff  was  elected  yearly.  His  term  of  office  was  at  first 
half  a  year  and  later  a  year.^  In  addition  to  the  duties  al- 
ready mentioned,  he  viewed  fences  and  collected  taxes.  ^ 
In  1656,  he  was  ordered  to  see  that  **  swine  be  yoked  and 
ringed  according  to  order."  *  However,  he  appears  less 
and  less  frequently  in  the  town  records,  his  duties  being 
assigned  to  the  constable. 

In  Watertown,  Cambridge,  Dorchester,  and  Salem,  and 
probably  in  Roxbury,  there  was  a  town  clerk,  called  the  re- 
corder, chosen,  "to  keep  the  records  and  acts  of  the  town."** 
Dorchester,  in  1656  in  the  general  town  meeting  chose 
"Brother  William  Blake  the  elder  .  .  recorder  for  the  town  of 
Dorchester  and  to  attend  to  the  selectmen  from  time  to  time 
to  scribe  and  transcribe  such  orders  and  records  as  should  by 
them  be  committed  unto  him,  and  for  that  end  the  said 
William  Blake  shall  take  the  town  books  or  book  into  his 
hands  and  keeping  as  likewise  the  map  or  maps  concern- 
ing the  town  and  keep  them  securely  and  not  deliver  the 
same  to  any  but  by  order  from  some  of  the  selectmen."  ® 

As  has  been  seen,  town  orders  were  made  either  by  the 
selectmen  or  by  the  town  meeting,  both  being  equally  bind- 
ing upon  the  inhabitants.  But  the  problem  was,  how  to  let 
the  people  know  what  orders  had  been  passed  by  these 
bodies,  so  that  they  could  be  held  responsible  for  obeying 
them.     This  was  done  at  first  by  reading  all  new  orders  on 

1  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  13.  2  /^/rf,,  pp,  g^^  108,  162. 

3  Ibid.,  p.  96.  '  "  Ibid.,  p.  85. 

"  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  i.      ^Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  S4. 


132  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [132 

the  next  lecture  day  after  their  adoption  or  by  fixing  them 
"  upon  some  observable  place,  so  that  the  offenders  may 
have  no  excuse  or  pretence."  This  method  was  soon  felt 
to  be  inadequate,  Salem,  as  early  as  1638,  lamenting  the 
lack  of  a  "  print  house  "  to  print  the  town  ordinances.  To 
compensate  for  the  lack  of  that  and,  in  order  that  every 
inhabitant  of  that  town  should  know  the  town  orders,  Salem 
adopted  the  plan  of  ordering  them  to  visit  the  keeper  of  the 
town  records  and  there  to  "  statisfy  themselves  concerning 
the  ordinances  to  avoid  any  breach  thereof."  Roxbury  en- 
tered her  town  orders  in  her  town  book,  and,  when  the  town 
assembled  to  elect  officers,  they  were  read  to  the  inhabitants, 
who  could  change  them  if  they  so  desired. 

It  was  no  easy  matter  to  become  an  inhabitant  of  a 
seventeenth  century  town.  No  one,  man,  woman,  or  child, 
was  wanted  there  unless  he  could  give  a  satisfactory  reason 
for  coming  and  could  prove  that  he  would  not  be  a  burden 
upon  the  community.  The  General  Court  itself  was  very 
careful  about  admitting  strangers.  In  1637,  1638,  and  1647 
it  forbade  any  town  to  receive  any  stranger  "  resorting 
hither  with  intent  to  reside  in  the  jurisdiction,"  or  "  to  allow 
any  one  a  lot  or  habitation,"  or  to  entertain  any  "  above 
three  weeks,  without  the  consent  of  a  mag'strate  or  the 
selectmen."  Salem,  in  1657,  found  occasion  to  caution  its  in- 
habitants to  keep  this  law,  under  penalty  of  a  fine  of  twenty 
shillings  a  week  during  the  time  it  was  broken.  Several 
fines  were  imposed,  and  finally,  in  1670,  an  officer  was  ap- 
pointed to  go  from  house  to  house  about  the  town  once  a 
month  to  inquire  what  strangers  "  had  come  or  had  privily 
thrust  themselves  into  the  town,  and  to  give  notice  to  the 
selectmen  in  being  from  time  to  time,  and  he  shall  have  the 
fines   for  his   pains."  ^     Security   for  good   behavior   and 

1  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  291. 


133]  TOWN  GOVERNMENT  133 

capacity  for  self-support  on  the  part  of  the  new  comer  was 
often  required.  The  form  of  the  security  was  as  follows: 
"  Whereas  Samuel  Hicks  of  Cambridge  hath  mentioned  his 
desire  unto  the  selectmen  of  Dorchester  to  be  received  for  an 
inhabitant  into  the  towne  they  in  the  name  and  behalf  of  the 
town,  have  so  farforth  granted  his  request,  as  that  he  give 
sufficient  security,  whereby  the  town,  may  be  freed  and 
secured  from  all  such  costs  and  charges,  as  there  by  come 
upon  it.     Therefore, 

I,  Zacchary  Hicks  of  Cambridge,  his  brother  on  the  behalf 
of  the  above  said  Samuel  Hicks,  as  his  security,  by  these 
presents  do  bind  myself  in  a  bond  of  twenty  pounds  unto 
Mr  William  Pope,  Recorder,  of  the  town,  in  the  name,  and 
on  the  behalf  of  the  selectmen,  to  secure  the  towne  of  what- 
soever charges  or  damages  may  ensue  or  follow  thereupon 
during  his  abode  in  the  towne  of  Dorchester.  And  here- 
vnto  I  have  set  my  hand,  this  ninth  day  of  January  1665 
and  delivered  it  as  my  act  and  deed."  ^ 

The  selectmen  of  one  town  frequently  asked  permission 
from  the  selectmen  of  another  town  for  an  inhabitant  of  the 
one  to  visit  in  the  second.  "At  a  meeting  of  the  selectmen 
of  Dorchester,  in  1665,"  there  was  presented  unto  them  "a 
note  from  the  selectmen  of  Boston,  containing  a  request 
from  them,  that  the  Widow  Collins  might  be  permitted  to 
pass  the  winter  here  in  our  town  and  thereby  engaging  them- 
selves, that  her  reception  should  not  disoblige  them  from  the 
duty  they  owe  her  as  one  of  their  inhabitants.  A  Copy 
whereof  is  here  inserted. 

To  the  Selectmen  of  Dorchester. 
These  are  to  advise,  that  if  the  Widow  Collins  be  permitted 
by  you  to  pass  the  winter  in  your  towne,  that  your  recep- 
tion of  her  shall  not  be  to  disoblige  us   from  the  duty 
which  we  owe  unto  her  as  one  of  our  inhabitants. 
1  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  130. 


134  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [134 

The  Selectment  of  Dorchester  do  accept  of  the  request  of 
the  Selectmen  of  Boston  on  the  behalf  of  the  Widow  Collins, 
and  do  grant  her  liberty  to  remain  and  reside  here  amongst 
us  till  the  I.  day  of  May,  1666."  ^ 

Those  who  did  not  give  security  to  the  selectmen  and  those 
who  came  into  the  town  without  permission,  were  notified 
by  the  constable,  acting  under  orders  from  the  selectmen,  to 
"  get  some  person  to  give  security  to  the  selectmen  for  their 
abiding  in  the  town  or  to  depart  the  town."  ^  In  other 
cases,  they  and  their  entertainers  were  fined  for  their  com- 
ing as  an  inhabitant  into  the  town  without  permission,  or 
were  ordered  to  leave  the  town,  or  were  summoned  before 
the  selectmen  and  compelled  to  give  security.  For  example, 
at  a  meeting  of  the  selectmen  of  Watertown  at  the  house  of 
Joseph  Tainter's  in  1680,  Joseph  Underwood  appeared  be- 
fore the  selectmen  by  warrant  to  answer  for  entertaining 
one  of  his  sisters  who  was  newly  married.  He  at  once, 
"  for  himself,  heirs,  executors,  and  assigns,"  gave  a  bond  of 
forty  pounds  unto  the  town  in  behalf  of  his  sister  and  her 
husband  that  they  should  not  be  chargeable  to  the  town.^ 

Every  town  was  responsible  for  its  inhabitants  and  was 
not  allowed  to  permit  them  to  become  a  burden  upon  another 
town.  On  June  3rd,  1634,  the  General  Court  ordered  that, 
"  Whereas  Thomas  Lane,  late  servant  to  John  Burslyn,  by 
the  providence  of  God  is  fallen  lame  and  impotent  &  hath 
since  remained  at  Dorchester,  where  he  hath  been  charge- 
able to  that  plantation  &  like  so  to  continue,  it  is  therefore 
ordered  that  the  inhabitants  of  Wessaguscus  shall  send  to 
Dorchester  to  the  said  Thomas  Lane,  &  shall  pay  for  all  the 

^Dorchester  Town  Records,  pp.  130-131. 
2  Ibid.,  p.  212. 

«  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  148;  Cambridge  Town  Records,  pp. 
108,  155.  193- 


135]  TOWN  GOVERNMENT  13- 

charges  they  have  been  at  in  keeping  him  during  his  abode 
at  Dorchester.^ 

Before  receiving  a  new  inhabitant,  many  towns  required 
as  a  guarantee  of  good  citizenship  a  certificate  of  character, 
signed  by  a  well-known  citizen  of  the  place  from  which  he 
came.  Salem,  Roxbury,  and  Watertown  were  very  strict 
in  this  matter,^  Roxbury  ordering  in  1672  that  no  person, 
new  to  the  ttown,  should  be  admitted  to  any  family  for  more 
than  one  week  without  permission  from  the  selectmen  under 
a  penalty  of  twenty  shillings.^  Dorchester,  in  1671,  fined 
an  inhabitant  for  entertaining  his  brother-in-law  without 
permission  from  the  selectmen.* 

Some  town  regulations  were  of  a  very  personal  character. 
In  Watertown  only  certain  favored  inhabitants  could 
"  weare  silk  goods,  or  silk  scarfs,  gold  or  silver  lace  or  but- 
tons," while  every  one  was  inspected  by  the  selectmen  with 
a  view  to  the  "  improvement  of  their  times  both  concerning 
their  souls  as  of  their  bodies."  ^  The  selectmen  forced 
every  man  and  woman  to  enter  some  profitable  employment, 
and,  when  parents  did  not  provide  for  their  children,  they 
gave  them  into  the  care  of  some  one  able  to  support  them. 
In  1 67 1  the  selectmen  of  Dorchester  gave  a  certain  Steven 
and  John  Hoppen  a  "  fortnight's  time  for  to  provide  them 
some  masters,  such  as  the  selectmen  shall  approve  of."* 
Shortly  after  this  order  had  been  given,  the  said  Steven 
Hoppen  reported  to  the  selectmen  that  he  "  had  agreed 
with  Joseph  Long  to  attend  his  boat."     This  occupation, 

^  Mass.  Col  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  121. 

^Cambridge  Town  Records,  pp.  50,  112;  Roxbury  Town  Records, 
p.  147. 

*  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  72. 

*  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  177. 

*  Watertown  Town  Records,  p  .73. 
«  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  177. 


136  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [136 

however,  was  not  approved  of  by  the  selectmen,  and  he 
promised  by  the  last  day  of  the  week  to  set  himself  under 
another  man,  permission  being  granted  him  to  do  so,  pro- 
vided he  brought  to  the  selectmen  "  under  the  hand  of  the 
man  that  he  agrees  with  that  he  have  so  done,  and  to  such 
a  man  as  the  selectmen  shall  approve  of."^ 

The  selectmen  allowed  no  one  to  destroy  the  peace  of  the 
town.  In  Dorchester,  in  1674,  they  instructed  the  con- 
stable to  give  a  certain  man  "  notice  that  complaint  is  made 
of  some  abuse  that  is  committed  at  or  about  his  house  by 
playing  at  kittle-pins  and  expending  of  time  idly,  and  there- 
fore that  he  reform  such  abuse  or  further  action  will  be 
taken.  "2 

The  towns  were  very  particular  about  allowing  within 
their  bounds  inns  where  liquor  was  sold.  All  such  places 
were  licensed  by  the  county  courts,  usually  upon  the  re- 
commendation of  the  selectmen  of  the  town  where  the  inn 
was  to  be.  In  1666  the  selectmen  of  Dorchester  recom- 
mended to  the  county  court  of  Suffolk  that  a  license  be 
granted  to  a  certain  Nicholas  George,  who  "  for  diverse 
years  kept  a  house  of  common  entertainment "  in  the  town. 
There  had  been  many  complaints  about  the  character  of 
this  house,  but  the  selectmen,  who  had  "  indeavored  by  their 
best  wisdome  to  find  out  the  truth  of  such  reports  "  and  had 
found  them  groundless,*  endorsed  his  application  for  the 
license. 

1  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  177.  ^  ^hid.,  p.  199. 

« Ibid.,  pp.  140-141. 


CHAPTER  VI 
The  Church 

The  fact  that  the  settlers  of  Massachusetts  came  to 
America  to  put  into  practice  a  definite  religious  system 
explains  many  features  peculiar  to  the  colony  which  they 
established  after  reaching  this  side  of  the  Atlantic.  Par- 
ticularly does  it  account  for  that  close  union  between  church 
and  state  which  made  the  Massachusetts  church  of  the  seven- 
teenth century  the  particular  care  of  the  civil  authorities, 
which  gave  to  the  church  officers  such  influence  in  civil 
affairs,  which  required  the  civil  magistrates  to  punish  moral 
and  religious  offenses,  and  which  made  even  citizenship  in 
the  colony  depend  upon  membership  in  the  church.  For 
men  founding  a  state  with  this  purpose  in  view  must  neces- 
sarily watch  over  the  welfare  of  the  church,  heed  its  ad- 
vice, punish  violations  of  its  laws,  and  allow  only  those  who 
agreed  with  the  doctrines  it  taught  to  become  citizens  of  the 
commonwealth  they  were  seeking  to  establish. 

From  the  very  inception  of  the  colony,  the  importance  of 
the  minister  was  recognized  and  his  support  provided  for. 
At  first,  this  was  looked  after  by  the  company  which  sent 
ministers  to  its  plantation  in  America.  But  after  the  re- 
moval of  the  company  to  this  country,  the  support  of  the 
minister  became  one  of  the  functions  of  the  local  government, 
though  the  central  government  watched  carefully  to  see  that 
the  support  was  adequate.  The  assistants  at  their  first  meet- 
ing, August  23,  1630,  discussed  the  question  of  the  support 
137]  137 


1 38  EARL Y  NEW  ENGLAND  TO WNS  [  1 38 

of  the  ministers  and  resolved  that  houses  should  be  built 
for  them  with  all  possible  speed  at  the  public  charge,  Sir 
Richard  Saltonstall,  undertaking  to  see  that  this  was  done 
at  his  plantation  for  Mr.  Phillips  and  the  governor  at  the 
other  plantation  for  Mr.  Wilson,  and  that  they  should  be 
allowed  provision  enough  to  support  them.  Mr.  Phillips 
was  given  three  hogsheads  of  meal,  one  of  meat,  four 
bushels  of  Indian  corn,  one  bushel  of  oatmeal  and  half  a 
hundred  of  salt  fish,  as  well  as  other  provisions  too  numer- 
ous to  mention;  or,  if  he  preferred,  he  was  allowed  twenty- 
one  pounds  in  money  from  which  he  must  provide  for  him- 
self. Mr  Wilson  was  allowed  twenty-four  pounds  per  annum 
until  his  wife  should  come  over.  All  this  was  to  be  done 
at  the  common  charge,  Salem  and  Mattapan — afterward 
Dorchester — ^being  the  only  settlements  not  called  upon  to 
contribute.^  Again,  on  November  30th,  1630,  the  court  of 
assistants  ordered  that  sixty  pounds  should  be  collected  from 
the  several  plantations  for  the  maintenance  of  Mr.  Wilson 
and  Mr.  Phillips,  of  which  sum  Boston  was  required  to  pay 
twenty  pounds,  Watertown  twenty  pounds,  and  Roxbury 
six  pounds.^ 

The  first  ministers  sent  to  the  Massachusetts  Bay  Colony, 
Higginson,  Skelton,  and  Bright  who  were  sent  to  Salem  in 
1629,  came  under  a  definite  contract  made  with  the  com- 
pany, by  which  contract  they  were  guaranteed  support.  Mr. 
Higginson  agreed  to  come  to  America,  provided  he  was  al- 
lowed thirty  pounds  to  buy  apparel  and  other  necessary 
articles,  ten  pounds  for  books,  and  free  passages  for  him- 
self, wife  and  children.  A  salary  of  thirty  pounds  a  year 
was  promised  him  and  a  house,  land,  firewood  and  food 
were  guaranteed  him  for  three  years — the  house  and  ap- 
purtenances to  be  a  parsonage  for  him  and  his  successors. 

1  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  73-  *  Ibid.,  p.  82. 


139]  THE  CHURCH  I^q 

At  the  end  of  the  three  years  he  was  to  have  on  hundred 
acres  of  land,  and,  at  the  end  of  seven  years,  an  additional 
one  hundred.  If  he  died  within  that  time,  his  wife,  while 
she  remained  a  widow,  and  his  children  were  to  be  sup- 
ported in  the  plantation.  If  he  went  back  to  England  at 
the  end  of  the  three  years,  he  was  to  have  free  passage  for 
all  his  family  as  well  as  for  himself.  Similar  contracts 
were  made  with  Skelton  and  Bright.^ 

Since  the  settlers  of  Massachusetts  came  to  this  country 
"  to  walk  in  the  faith  of  the  gospel — according  to  the  order 
of  the  gospel,"  their  first  thought  after  landing  here  was  to 
gather  into  churches  as  the  best  means  for  promoting  this 
end.  The  Salem  church  was  the  first  one  or^ganized  in  the 
colony.  It  is  interesting  to  notice  the  exact  steps  taken  in 
its  formation,  for  the  organization  of  a  church,  in  the  eyes 
of  the  Puritans  was  a  solemn  act  and  one  to  be  performed 
only  after  due  deliberation.  The  method  pursued  at  Salem 
was  this, — after  Mr.  Higginson  arrived,  "  the  settlers  at 
Salem  considered  with  their  brethren  at  Plymouth  what 
steps  to  take  for  the  more  exact  acquaintance  with  the 
written  word,"  and,  having  the  concurrence  and  countenance 
of  their  deputy-governor,  John  Endicott,  and  the  approving 
presence  of  the  messengers  from  the  church  at  Plymouth, 
they  set  aside  the  first  day  of  August  "for  fasting  and  prayer 
for  the  settling  of  a  church  state  among  them  and  for  their 
making  a  confession  of  their  faith  and  entering  into  a  holy 
covenant  whereby  that  church  state  was  founded."  Mr. 
Higginson  then  became  their  teacher  and  Mr.  Skelton  their 
pastor  and  "one  Mr.  Houghton  ruling  elder."  "They  lived 
very  peaceably  in  Salem  together  until  the  death  of  Mr. 
Higginson  which  was  about  a  twelvemonth  after  and  then 
of  Mr.  Skelton  who  did  not  long  survive  him.      So  you 

1  Hazard,  Coll.,  vol.  i,  p.  256. 


I40  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [140 

have  seen  the  nativity  of  the  first  church  in  the  Massachu- 
setts colony,"  Mather  adds  quaintly.^ 

The  churches  of  the  other  towns  under  discussion  were 
organized  in  a  similar  fashion.  As  soon  as  the  many  de- 
tails connected  with  founding  a  town  in  a  new  land  were  at- 
tended to,  the  settlers  met  in  a  body,  confessed  their  sins, 
professed  their  faith,  and  united  in  church  membership. 
The  only  exception  to  this  is  the  church  at  Dorchester,  which 
was  organized  before  the  settlers  of  that  town  left  England 
and  the  ministers  of  which,  Mr.  Warham  and  Mr.  Maverick, 
were  chosen  at  the  same  time.^  But  even  this  church  was 
reorganized  after  its  members  reached  America  for  Mather 
tells  us  of  the  ^gathering  of  a  church  at  Dorchester  shortly 
after  the  founding  of  one  at  Charlestown,  on  August  27th, 
1630.® 

The  church  of  Watertown  was  organized  immediately 
after  the  leaders  of  that  group  of  settlers, — Saltonstall  and 
Phillips — had  decided  to  settle  upon  the  present  site  of 
Watertown.  They  "  resolved  that  they  would  combine  into 
a  church  fellowship  there  as  their  first  work  and  build  the 
house  of  God  before  they  could  build  many  houses  for 
themselves."  This  was  in  the  month  after  they  landed, 
July  30,  1630.  They  drew  up  a  holy  covenant  to  which 
forty  men  subscribed  their  names.  In  it,  they  thanked  God 
for  their  "  escape  from  the  pollutions  of  the  world  "  and 
gave  their  reasons  for  coming  to  America,  namely,  "  to 
serve  God  without  fear  in  holiness  and  righteousness  all  the 
days  of  their  lives."  Then  they  took  an  oath  to  serve  the 
Lord  faithfully,  "to  cleave  unto  his  worship,  administra- 
tions, ministry,  and  government  ...  as  unto  the  most  clear 
sight  and  infallible  rule  and  all  sufificient  canon."  * 

1  Mather,  Magnolia,  vol.  i,  p.  66.  2  Young's  Chronicles,  p.  345- 

«  Mather,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  73.       *  Mather,  Magnalia,  vol.  i,  p.  341. 


141]  THE  CHURCH  14! 

In  Cambridge  contrary  to  the  usual  custom  no  church  was 
formed  for  some  years  after  the  founding  of  that  town. 
This  was  due  probably  to  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  its 
origin  and  to  the  fact  that  so  few  people  lived  there  during 
the  first  year  of  its  existence.  Prince  says,  ''Master  Thomas 
Dudley  and  others  had  no  settled  minister  until  Mr.  Hooker 
came  in  1633;"  ^  and  an  entry  in  Winthrop's  journal,  dated 
October  nth,  1633,  reads,  "to-day  a  fast  at  New  Towne 
where  Mr.  Hooker  was  chosen  pastor  and  Mr.  Stone 
Teacher  in  such  manner  as  before  at  Boston."  ^  The  church 
at  Roxbury  was  organized  before  1632.  John  Eliot,  who 
came  to  New  England  in  1631,  became  its  pastor,  November 
5th,  1632,  after  having  been  with  the  Boston  church  about 
a  year.^ 

Before  organizing  a  new  church,  it  was  necessary  to 
secure  the  approval  of  the  churches  already  organized  and 
the  sanction  of  the  magistrates.  "Forasmuch  as  it  hath  been 
found  by  sad  experience  that  much  trouble  and  disturbance 
hath  happened  both  to  the  church  and  to  the  civil  state  by  the 
officers  and  members  of  some  churches,  which  have  been 
gathered  within  the  limits  of  this  jurisdiction  in  an  undue 
manner,  and  not  with  such  public  approbation  as  were  meet, 
it  is  therefore  ordered  that  all  persons  are  to  take  notice  that 
this  Court  doth  not,  nor  will  hereafter,  approve  of  any  such 
companies  of  men  as  shall  henceforth  join  in  any  pretended 
way  of  church  fellowship,  without  they  shall  first  acquaint 
the  magistrates,  and  the  elders  of  the  greater  part  of  the 
churches  in  this  jurisdiction,  with  their  intentions,  and  have 
their  approbation  therein.    And,  ffurther  it  is  ordered,  that 

1  Prince,  Annals,  p.  597.  2  Savage's  Winthrop,  vol.,  i  p.  137. 

3  Ibid.,  vol.  I,  p.  Ill ;  Magnalia,  vol.  i,  p.  48.  For  a  full  account  of  the 
order  in  which  churches  were  organized  in  Massachusetts,  see  Savage's 
Winthrop,  vol.  i,  p.  114. 


142  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [142 

no  person,  being  a  member  of  any  churches  which  shall 
hereafter  be  gathered  without  the  approbation  of  the  magis- 
trates and  the  greater  part  of  the  said  churches,  shall  be 
admitted  to  the  freedom  of  this  commonwealth."^  This 
approbation  was  never  given  without  due  examination  of 
the  members  wishing  to  form  the  new  congregation,  and 
was  withheld  if  the  examination  did  not  prove  satisfactory. 
In  1636,  "  Mr.  Mather  and  others  of  Dorchester,  intending 
to  begin  a  new  church  there  (a  great  part  of  the  old  one 
being  gone  to  Connecticut),  desired  the  approbation  of  the 
other  churches  and  of  the  Magistrates;  and  accordingly 
they  assembled  this  day,"  April  i,  1636,  "for  examination." 
But  the  proofs  of  "  the  work  of  God's  grace  "  in  them  did 
not  satisfy  the  elders  and  magistrates  assembled  to  examine 
the  would-be  members,  and,  therefore,  they  decided  they 
were  "  not  meet  at  present  to  be  the  foundation  of  a  church." 
The  reasons  for  this  refusal  were,  that  "  most  of  them  (Mr. 
Mather  and  one  other  excepted)  had  builded  their  comfort 
upon  unsound  grounds,  some  upon  dreams,  some  upon 
reformation  of  their  lives,  and  others  upon  duties."^ 

During  the  seventeenth  century,  it  was  the  custom  in  a 
Massachusetts  town  for  the  church  to  have  two  ministers 
or  elders — ^the  pastor  and  the  teacher.  To  these  was 
added  a  layman  called  the  "  ruling  elder,"who  assisted  in 
the  administration  of  the  church's  affairs,  called  meetings, 
presided  over  them,  prepared  business  to  be  laid  before 
them,  and  in  all  possible  ways  aided  the  ministers.  The 
distinction  between  the  two  ministers  is  not  very  clear,  and, 
at  times,  the  functions  of  the  two  were  combined  in  one. 
Cotton  says  that  the  difference  between  pastor  and  teacher 
was  found  in  Romans  12  7,  but  he  advises  that  if  a  man  have 

^Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  168. 

2  Savage's  Winthrop,  vol.  i,  pp.  218-219. 


143]  ^^^  CHURCH  143 

the  gifts  of  both  let  him  use  them/  However,  it  is  prob- 
able that  the  special  work  of  the  pastor  was  "  practical 
exhortation  to  right  living,"  while  that  of  the  teacher  was 
"  inculcation  of  doctrine."^ 

While  in  theory  the  church  of  each  town  was  independ- 
ent and  at  liberty  to  choose  its  own  officers,  in  reality  its 
choice  was  carefully  supervised  by  the  colony  acting  through 
the  colonial  magistrates  and  the  pastors  of  the  other 
churches,  among  which  Boston  seems  to  have  been  most 
important.  The  trouble  at  Watertown,  in  1631,  is  a  good 
illustration  of  this  careful  supervision.  In  that  year,  "  the 
congregation  at  Watertown  chose  one  Richard  Brown  for 
their  elder,  though  he  persisted  in  his  opinion  of  the  Romish 
church  and  was  a  man  of  very  violent  spirit."  The  General 
Court  wrote  to  the  pastor  and  people  begging  them  to  con- 
sider the  faults  above  mentioned  before  electing  him.  In 
reply,  the  Watertown  congregation  demanded  proof  of  the 
charges  made  against  Mr.  Brown;  these  were  given  and, 
although  all  were  not  persuaded,  many  were  so  far  in- 
fluenced by  the  accusations  that  the  church  became  "  much 
divided  about  the  elder,"  and,  finally,  asked  the  advice  of 
Governor  Winthrop.  He  went  to  Watertown,  and  the 
"  matter  was  debated  before  many  of  both  congregations, 
and  by  the  approbation  of  all  the  assembly  except  three 
was  concluded  an  error. "^  But  this  did  not  quiet  the 
strife,  many  continuing  to  hold  the  forbidden  opinion 
in  favor  of  the  elder  and  the  Romish  church.  Finally,  in 
the  following  year,  1632,  the  "  Separatists  were  given  a 
day  to  come  in,  whereupon  they  all  submitted,"  and 
the  elder,  Richard  Brown,  was  discharged  "  for  his  unfit- 

1  Mass.  Arch.,  vol.  240,  p.  3. 

^Platform  of  Church  Discipline,  chaps.  6  and  7. 

*  Savage's  Winthrop,  vol.  i,  pp.  70-80. 


144  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [144 

ness  in  regard  of  his  passions  and  distemper  in  spirit."^ 
Salem  offers  another  good  illustration  of  the  careful  super- 
vision exercised  by  the  colony  over  the  choice  of  a  man  to 
preach  the  gospel.  In  1634,  the  General  Court,  hearing 
that  the  Salem  church  "  had  called  Mr.  Williams  to  have  the 
office  of  teacher,"  wrote  to  Mr.  Endicott  asking  the  town 
to  consider  the  matter  further,  as,  in  the  opinion  of  the 
Court,  Roger  Williams  was  not  worthy  of  that  office. 
Salem  disregarded  this  request,  and  installed  Mr.  Williams, 
whereupon  the  Court  punished  the  town  by  refusing,  in 
1635,  to  give  to  it  a  certain  amount  of  land  at  Marblehead, 
which  land  Salem  greatly  desired.  In  spite  of  this  punish- 
ment, Salem  remained  obdurate,  and,  moreover,  sought 
the  support  of  her  sister  churches  by  sending  to  them  a 
circular  letter  stating  her  grievances.  For  this  act  of 
defiance,  the  General  Court  refused  to  admit  the  Salem 
deputies  to  the  next  session  of  that  body  until  they  gave 
satisfaction  for  the  letter.  This  they  were  loath  to  do,  but 
after  being  disciplined  further,  they  finally  submitted. 

Dorchester  furnishes  us  with  an  illustration  of  the  fact 
that,  in  case  of  trouble  in  a  church  which  its  members  were 
unable  to  settle,  appeal  was  made  to  the  judgment  of  the 
other  churches.  In  1640,  "  the  church  of  Dorchester  being 
furnished  with  an  very  godly  and  able  pastor,  one  Mr. 
Mather,"  invited  Mr.  Burr  to  become  their  other  pastor. 
Before  he  accepted,  he  was  heard  to  utter  sentiments 
"  savoring  of  familism."  This  led  to  an  argument  between 
him  and  Mather  and  to  a  division  in  the  Dorchester  church, 
part  of  the  congregation  favoring  Mather  and  part  Burr. 
Finally,  unable  to  come  to  any  agreement,  they  appealed  to 
the  other  churches,  and  the  governor,  deputy-governor,  a 
magistrate,  and  about  ten  elders  from  other  churches,  came 

1  Savage's  Winthrop,  vol.  i,  pp.  113-114. 


145]  ^^^  CHURCH  145 

to  settle  the  dispute.  They  spent  four  days  in  discussing 
the  relative  merits  of  the  question,  after  which  both  Burr 
and  Mather  yielded  sufficiently  to  effect  a  reconciliation.^ 

The  ministers  were  frequently  corrected  for  making  re- 
marks which  did  not  please  the  other  ministers  or  the 
magistrates.  In  1634  Mr.  Eliot,  of  Roxbury,  in  a  sermon 
criticised  the  ministry  for  making  peace  with  the  Pequods 
without  the  consent  of  the  people.  When  this  remark  be- 
came known  to  the  governor  and  council,  three  men  were 
appointed  "  to  deal  with  him,  to  bring  him  to  see  his  error." 
This  they  did  so  effectively  that  Mr.  Eliot  confessed  that  he 
had  misjudged  the  authorities,  admitted  that  they  could 
make  peace  alone,  and  so  expressed  himself  in  the  pulpit  the 
following  Sunday.^ 

This  supervision  was  not  approved  of  by  many  of  the 
churches,  and  petiti'?ns  were  frequently  sent  to  the  General 
Court  asking  that  more  freedom  be  allowed  the  individual 
churches.  Salem  p-iLitioned  the  Court  against  an  order 
which  it  passed  that  no  church  could  call  a  minister  "  unless 
approved  of  by  ye  four  next  r.d joining  elders  or  congrega- 
tions," giving  as  the  reason  of  this  request  that  such  an 
order  encroached  upon  the  liberties  of  the  church/ 

During  the  seventeenth  century,  the  minister  of  a  Massa- 
chusetts church  was  a  town  official  elected  by  the  inhabitants 
in  the  town  meeting  as  was  any  other  officer  of  the  town — 
selectman,  constable,  surveyor,  or  tithingman.  He  differed 
from  these,  however,  in  holding  office  for  life,  while  they 
were  elected  annually.  In  many  towns,  of  course,  the  min- 
ister who  remained  in  office  during  the  greater  part  of  the 
century  came  from  England  with  the  congregation,  being, 

^  Savage's  Winthrop,  vol.  2,  p.  26  et  seq. 
2  Ihid.,  vol.  I,  p.  179  et  seq. 
^  Mass.  Arch.,  vol.  10,  p.  84. 


146  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND.  TOWNS  [146 

in  many  cases,  the  leader  of  the  enterprise.  But,  where 
this  was  not  the  case,  or  where  the  death  or  the  removal  of 
the  minister  who  accompanied  the  congregation  to  America 
compelled  the  choice  of  a  new  one,  this  held  true.  The 
ministers  of  Watertown  for  the  greater  part  of  the  century 
were  Mr.  Sherman  and  Mr.  Knowles,  but  in  1674  the  town 
voted  that  it  desired  "  Mr.  Thomas  Clark  to  be  helpful  to 
Mr.  Shearman  in  the  preaching  of  the  word  amongst  vs,"  ^ 
declaring  this  by  a  full  vote  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  town. 
In  1669  there  was  public  meeting  of  the  inhabitants  of  the 
town  of  Cambridge  to  "  consider  of  a  supply  for  the  min- 
istry ...  to  take  up  the  breach  that  God's  afflicting  provi- 
dence had  made  in  that  place."  ^ 

All  expenses  connected  with  the  church  and  the  minister 
were  born  by  the  town,  every  inhabitant  of  which,  whether  a 
church  member  or  not,  being  required  to  contribute  for  this 
purpose.  Watertown  supported  its  minister  by  a  "  rate  justly 
levied  upon  every  man  proportionably  unto  his  estate,"  * 
and  prevented  any  one's  escaping  this  tax  by  ordering  that 
"  all  single  persons  that  live  at  their  own  hands  and  have 
not  fifteen  pounds  visable  estate  "  should  be  rated  for  the 
ministry  at  fifteen  pounds,  while  all  those  who  had  an  in- 
come from  trade  equal  to  that  sum  should  be  rated  at  the 
same  amount."*  Roxbury  and  Cambridge  raised  the  money 
necessary  for  the  minister  and  the  church  by  a  tax  "  born 
by  all  the  inhabitants  in  an  equal  proportion."  ^  Salem, 
which  at  first  seemed  rather  disinclined  to  tax  those  who 
were  not  members  of  the  church  for  the  support  of  the  min- 

^  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  1 19. 
2  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  179. 

'  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  i.  *  Ibid.,  p.  33. 

*  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  1 1 ;  Cambridge  Town  Records,  pp.  85, 
130. 


147]  ^^^  CHURCH  147 

ister  and  the  church,  decided,  in  1645,  that  "  non-members 
of  that  congregation  should  be  rated  for  the  helping  and 
the  supporting  of  some  of  the  public  ordinances  of  the 
church,  as,  namely,  the  preaching  of  the  word."  ^ 

Over  this  question  of  the  minister's  support  the  General 
Court  exercised  constant  supervision,  noting  with  jealous 
eye  the  provision  made  for  him  by  each  town.  In  1630  it 
ordered  houses  to  be  built  for  them  at  the  expense  of  the 
colony.^  In  1654  rumor  reached  the  Court  that  the  towns 
were  not  properly  paying  the  ministers,  whereupon  it  or- 
dered the  county  courts  to  investigate  the  matter  and  to  de- 
cide "  what  maintenance  should  be  allowed  to  the  minis- 
ters .  .  .  and  issue  warrents  to  the  selectmen  to  assess  and 
constables  to  collect  same;"  and,  in  1657,  it  ordered  an  in- 
quiry to  be  made  to  see  which  towns  were  not  paying  them 
living  salaries.^  The  committee  appointed  to  investigate 
this  matter  in  the  towns  of  Suffolk  County  reported  that 
Dorchester,  then  a  town  of  one  hundred  and  twenty  fami- 
lies, was  paying  the  minister  one  hundred  pounds  and  that 
Roxbury,  composed  of  eighty  families,  was  giving  each  of 
its  two  ministers  sixty  pounds.*  Again,  in  1660,  the  Gen- 
eral Court  turned  its  attention  to  the  question  of  providing 
adequate  salaries  for  the  ministers,  this  time  ordering  the 
county  courts  to  look  after  the  ministers  from  time  to  time 
to  assure  themselves  that  "  the  charge  of  their  procuring  and 
settling  be  levied  on  the  inhabitants,  as  the  law  for  main- 
tenance of  ministers  directs."  ^ 

The  ministers  were  well  paid,  considering  the  conditions 

^  Salem  Town  Records,  p.  140. 

^Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  i,  p.  7Z- 

8  Ihid.,  vol.  3,  p.  424. 

*  Mass.  Arch.,  vol.  421,  pp.  215,  216. 

^  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  4,  pt.  i,  p.  417. 


148  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [i^g 

in  the  towns,  though  Mather  says  that  the  churches  "  pre- 
ferred them  to  be  like  stars  rather  than  Hke  lamps  of  the 
churche  provided,  like  the  stars,  they  would  shine  without 
the  supply  of  any  earthly  contribution  to  them."  ^  However, 
the  amount  of  actual  money  granted  them  yearly  was  small, 
Watertown,  in  1642,  paid  one  minister  for  half  a  year 
33£,  6s,  8d,  and  the  other,  2o£.^  In  1648  it  allowed  each 
pastor  sixty  ^  pounds;  in  1650,  each  "  four-score  pounds."  * 
Dorchester  paid  Mr.  Mather  eighty  pounds  and  Mr.  Stough- 
ton  thirty  pounds  per  annum. ''^'  After  Mr.  Mather's  death, 
Mr.  Stoughton  was  given  seventy  pounds ;  ^  and,  after  Mr. 
Flint  was  chosen  pastor,  his  salary  varied  from  seventy  to 
ninety  pounds.*^  Cambridge,  in  1657,  ordered  the  deacons 
to  "  make  a  levy  of  two  hundred  and  forty  pounds  for  the 
maintenance  this  year  and  for  the  payment  of  the  debts  of 
our  Reverend  Pastor  Mr.  Michell;"  ^  and  in  1696  it  appro- 
priated ninety  pounds  for  this  purpose. 

But  in  addition  to  the  money  paid  the  minister  annually, 
the  town  frequently  set  aside  a  certain  amount  of  land,  the 
income  from  which  was  devoted  to  the  support  of  the 
minister  and  the  church.  Cambridge,  in  1648,  set  aside 
1,000  acres  "  for  a  public  stock  to  be  improved  for  the  good 
of  the  church,"  and,  in  1682,  an  additional  500  acres  was 
appropriated  for  "  the  use  of  the  ministry  of  the  town  for- 
ever." In  1662  Roxbury  gave  twenty  acres  of  the  common 
land  to  be  used  forever  by  the  ministry,  carefully  specifying, 

^Magnolia,  vol.  2,  p.  427. 

2  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  9. 

8  Ibid.,  p.  IS.  *  ^^^d.,  p.  21. 

f^  Dorchester  Town  Records,  pp.  123,  130,  14S,  155. 

•  Ibid.,  pp.  163  and  170. 

f  Ibid.,  pp.  180,  188,  196. 

8  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  121. 


149]  ^^^  CHURCH  149 

however,  that  only  the  use  of  it  was  granted  them,  and  that 
they  did  not  own  the  land  and  had  no  privilege  of  selling  an 
acre/  Moreover,  the  town  usually  provided  a  house  for 
the  minister — Cambridge  and  Dorchester  both  did  this. 
Dorchester,  in  a  town  meeting  in  1669,  voted  to  build  a 
house  for  the  minister,  '*  to  remain  to  the  town  for  such  an 
end  and  the  house  to  be  2t^  foot  in  length  and  20  foot 
wide  and  14  foot  between  joints."  ^  This  plan  was  given 
up  later,  and  during  1670  and  1671  there  were  various  at- 
tempts made  to  buy  different  houses.^  Finally,  in  1671, 
a  rate  of  one  hundred  pounds  was  made  for  "  procuring 
a  comfortable  habitation  for  a  minister."  Although  there 
was  some  difficulty  in  collecting  the  entire  amount,  all  of 
it  not  being  paid  in  until  1674,  the  house  for  the  minister 
was  built*  In  1681  this  plan  was  again  discussed,  and  one 
hundred  pounds  was  again  appropriated  to  buy  a  house, ^  no 
reason,  however,  being  given  for  the  renewed  activity  in  this 
direction. 

The  minister  received  no  stated  salary,  but  was  paid  each 
year  what  the  town  could  afford.  The  usual  method  fol- 
lowed by  the  town  was  to  decide  in  town  meeting  what 
salary  should  be  allowed  for  the  coming  year,  to  proportion 
this  among  the  inhabitants,  and  to  order  the  deacons  to  col- 
lect it.  Roxbury  resolved,  February  ist,  1663,  in  a  town 
meeting  called  to  regulate  the  matter,  that  the  inhabitants  of 
the  town  were  to  decide  yearly  upon  the  salary;  that  they 
should  then  choose  by  vote  those  who  "  shall  make  the  pro- 
portion for  the  raising  that  sum;"  that  these  should  be 
the  deacons,  together  with  the  selectmen  and  whom  else  the 
body  should  please,  and  that  the  rate  should  be  paid  the  dea- 

1  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  38. 

2  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  162.  ^  /^/^/^  pp,  171  and  174. 
*  Ibid.,  p.  208.                                                    ^  Ibid.,  pp.  257  and  267. 


I50  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [150 

cons  quarterly.  At  the  end  of  the  quarter  the  names  of 
those  not  paying  were  to  be  given  by  the  deacons  "  to  the 
selectmen  or  those  legally  empowered  that  so  he  may  be 
freed  and  the  towns  estate  gatherd  in."  ^  Salem,  in  its 
early  years,  seems  to  have  used  two  methods  of  raising  a 
salary  for  the  minister,  namely,  voluntary  subscription — 
one  of  the  methods  mentioned  by  Cotton  Mather^ — and 
taxation.  In  1639,  the  first  time  that  the  minister's  salary 
is  mentioned  in  the  town  records,  there  was  a  voluntary 
town  contribution  toward  the  maintenance  of  the  ministry, 
which  was  paid  quarterly.^  In  1656,  "  it  was  voted 
and  agreed  by  the  town  that  they  voluntarily  yeald  up 
themselves  to  be  rated  by  those  whom  they  shall  choose  for 
the  raising  of  maintenance  for  the  ministry  when  need  shall 
require."  But  the  following  year,  1657,  they  returned  to  their 
original  plan,  voting  that  the  elder's  maintenance  should  be 
raised  by  subscription.  This  plan  proved  unsuccessful, 
many  refusing  to  contribute,  therefore,  in  the  next  year, 
1658,  it  was  decided  to  try  a  combination  of  the  two 
methods,  and  it  was  agreed  that  "  all  those  persons  that 
will  not  subscribe  nor  contribute  toward  the  maintenance 
of  the  ministry  shall  be  rated  and  the  selectmen  to  rate 
them." 

Dorchester  followed  the  usual  plan  in  paying  its  ministers. 
The  town  decided  in  town  meeting  what  the  salary  should 
be,  the  selectmen  or  "  raters  "  made  the  rate,  the  deacons 
gathered  it,  returning  to  the  selectmen  the  names  of  those 
who  did  not  pay;  and  the  selectmen  issued  warrants  to  the 
constables  to  collect  these  sums,  by  distress  if  necessary.* 
In  1674,  as  a  means  of  shaming  the  delinquents  into  paying, 
it  was  decided  that  at  the  general  town  meeting  in  the  tenth 

1  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  44.  ^  Magnolia,  vol.  2,  p.  427. 

"  Salem  Town  Records,  p.  93. 

*  Dorchester  Town  Records,  pp.  187,  188,  211. 


I5l]  THE  CHURCH  1^1 

month  from  year  to  year  the  names  of  those  that  had  not 
paid  their  proportions  to  the  ministry  for  the  year  past 
should  published.^  A  change  in  this  order  was  made  in 
1677.  The  town  then  voted,  "  that  for  the  year  following 
the  minister's  pay  should  be  paid  by  weekly  contribution 
each  Lord's  day  and  that  those  that  did  not  contribute 
should  be  rated  according  to  former  proportion."  ^  Dor- 
chester made  up  any  deficiency  in  the  minister's  salary  caused 
by  the  refusal  of  any  one  to  pay.  In  1679  a  list  of  "  the 
desperate  debts  of  what  should  have  been  paid  to  Mr.  Flint 
for  the  several  years,"  1672  to  1678,  was  made  out,  and  the 
town  ordered  that  these  debts  must  "  be  paid  or  made 
good  to  Mr.  Flint  some  other  way."  ^  These  "  desperate 
debts  "  amounted  to  y£,  4s,  and  iid,  and  were  partly  made- 
up  to  Mr.  Flint  by  an  extra  3£,  lis,  3d,  which  had  been  paid 
him  in  1671,  also  by  a  "load  of  clapboard"  which  had 
been  paid  him  in  1671,  also  by  a  "  load  of  clapboar  which 
he  had  of  Samuel  Trescot  being  part  of  his  rent  for  the 
ministry  land,"  and  by  the  "  overplus  of  those  rats  in  the 
several  years  "  which  came  to  "  6  pounds  and  10  pence." 
There  were  still  due  Mr.  Flint  at  the  end  of  the  year  1678 
about  three  pounds.  *  Watertown  required  dues  to  be 
paid  by  all  men  "  at  or  before  the  last  of  June  yearly."  ^ 
These  were  assessed  and  collected  in  the  same  manner  as  in 
the  other  towns. 

The  minister's  salary  was  often  paid  partly  in  money  and 
partly  in  produce,  the  town  meeting  in  deciding  upon  the 
amount  of  the  salary  fixing  the  proportion  of  each.  Cam- 
bridge ordered  its  minister  paid  partly  in  money  and  partly 
"  in  such  pay  as  is  suitable  to  the  end  intended."  ®     Dor- 

1  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  203.  2  ijjid.,  p.  221. 

8  Ibid.,  p.  237.  *  Ibid.,  pp.  238  and  239. 

«  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  94. 

«  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  196. 


152  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [152 

Chester,  in  1682,  appointed  three  days  for  "  bringing  in  and 
receiving  of  that  part  of  the  minister's  salary  which  is  to  be 
paid  in  country  pay  .  .  .  viz.  the  first  Monday  and  third  Mon- 
day in  February  and  the  first  Monday  in  March."  ^  Thence- 
forth, a  collector  was  chosen  annually  by  the  town  meeting, 
to  be  present  on  those  three  days  to  take  account  of  those 
bringing  their  share  and  of  those  failing  to  do  so.  In  1684 
the  collector,  Deacon  Blake,  makes  the  following  report, 
"  Received  of  the  rate  made  for  the  use  of  the  ministry  of 
Dorchester  for  the  year  one  thousand  six  hundred  eighty  and 
four  the  full  sum  of  forty-nine  pounds  three  shillings  and 
eight  penny  in  new  English  money  or  otherwise  to  my  con- 
tent. As  also  forty  and  nine  pounds  three  shillings  and  a 
penny  in  country  pay  or  the  value  thereof  to  content:  as 
also  four  and  thirty  shillings  worth  of  iron  of  Elder  With- 
ington's  gift  to  the  ministry  of  Dorchester ;  ...  so  that  the 
total  sum  delivered  to  me  and  received  by  me  is  an  hundred 
pounds."  ^  In  spite  of  all  these  precautions,  there  were 
many  who  failed  to  pay  their  share  of  the  minister's  rate. 
Pastor  Danforth  of  Dorchester  in  giving  a  discharge  to 
the  deacon  in  1691  said,  that  he  had  reckoned  with  Deacon 
Capin  again  on  the  4th  of  December  and  "all  the  above  men- 
tioned parcels  whether  of  wood  or  money,  being  reckoned  as 
part  of  the  pay  for  the  years  eighty-six,  eighty-seven  and 
eighty-eight,  yet  not  withstanding  there  was  due  to  him  for 
his  salary  for  those  three  years  more  than  twenty  pounds. 
But  considering  the  frowns  of  providence  upon  his  people 
here,  he  was  willing  to  give  that  in,  and  so  did  acknowl- 
edge himself  satisfied  and  acquitted  the  towne  of  Dorchester 
for  all  further  demands  of  any  salary  for  those  three 
years."  * 

1  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  266.  2  /^j^/.^  p.  278. 

8  Ibid.,  p.  320. 


153]  ^^^  CHURCH  153 

As  the  church  was  an  integral  part  of  the  town,  there 
was  naturally  at  first  only  one  meeting-house  in  the  town, 
as  there  was  only  one  town-house  or  one  watch-house.  This 
was  large  enough  to  accommodate  all  the  inhabitants  of 
the  town  and,  as  the  population  grew,  the  meeting-house  was 
either  enlarged  or,  if  that  were  not  possible,  a  new  one 
was  built  capable  of  accommodating  the  increased  popula- 
tion. As  has  been  shown  in  the  discussion  of  the  forma- 
tion of  new  towns,  the  building  of  additional  meeting- 
houses and  the  separation  of  the  inhabitants  into  different 
congregations  led  almost  invariably  to  the  formation  of  new 
settlements  from  the  original  town.  Cambridge  had  only  one 
meeting-house  in  which  all  its  inhabitants  met  as  one  con- 
gregation until  1659,  in  which  year  "the  remote  inhabitants 
on  the  south  side  of  the  river  were  abated  the  one-half  of 
their  proportion  to  the  minister's  allowance  during  the  time 
they  were  provided  with  an  able  minister  according  to 
law,"  ^  a  favor  which  Cambridge  had  refused  them  in  the 
year  1654  lest  "  the  fraction  might  prove  destructive  to 
the  whole  body."  What  they  feared  came  to  pass. 
The  new  congregation,  thus  formed,  soon  expressed  a 
desire  to  be  entirely  separate  from  that  of  Cambridge, 
and  from  it  developed  Newton.^  Lexington  separated 
from  Cambridge  in  the  same  way.  As  the  so-called 
Cambridge  farms,  it  first  asked  the  privilege  of  building  its 
own  meeting-house,  then  signified  its  willingness  to  pay  its 
own  minister,  and  finally  asked  to  be  released  from  union 
with  Cambridge  as  well. 

The  meeting-house  was  town  property  and  was  managed 
by  and  through  the  town  meeting.  In  that  assembly  re- 
pairs were  discussed,  plans  for  seating  people  were  formed, 

1  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  130. 

2  Paige,  History  of  Cambridge,  p.  264. 


154  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [154 

additions  were  ordered  made,  and  when  necessary  a  new 
meeting-house  was  ordered  to  be  built.  The  execution  of 
the  plans  formed  by  the  town  meeting  was  left  either  to  the 
selectmen,  to  the  deacons,  or  to  committees  chosen  for 
various  purposes.  In  1658  Roxbury  agreed  that  the  meet- 
ing-house "  should  be  repaired  for  the  warmth  and  comfort 
of  the  people,"  ^  and  empowered  the  selectmen  to  see  that 
this  was  done.  It  was  to  be  shingled  and  plastered,  two 
galleries  were  to  be  added,  and  the  bell  was  to  be  hung  con- 
veniently. In  1665  and  1666,  it  was  again  repaired,  this 
time  another  seat  being  added  in  the  men's  gallery.  In 
1672  the  town  voted  to  build  a  new  meeting-house,  as  near 
the  old  one  as  possible,  and  chose  a  committee  of  seven  men 
to  give  out  the  contracts  and  to  dispose  of  the  old  meeting- 
house.^ Cambridge,  in  1649,  voted  to  build  a  new  meeting- 
house "  about  forty  feet  square  and  covered  with  shingle." 
Salem,  in  1634,  ordered  a  new  meeting-house  built,  at  a  cost 
not  to  exceed  the  sum  of  one  hundred  pounds,^  and  meetings 
were  probably  held  in  a  private  house  until  this  was  finished. 
By  1638  this  meeting-house  had  become  too  small,  and, 
December  31st  of  that  year,  the  town  ordered  an  addition 
made  to  it  "  25  feet  long,  the  breadth  of  the  old  building, 
with  a  gallery  answerable  to  the  former,  one  catted  chimney 
of  twelve  feet  long,  and  four  feet  in  height  about  the  top 
of  the  building,"  ...  six  sufficient  windows,  and  stairs  to 
the  gallery.*  This  was  the  only  meeting-house  in  Salem 
until  1670.  Then  a  new  one  was  built,  at  the  west  end  "  of 
the  old  meeting-house  toward  the  prison,"  and  the  material 
from  the  old  meeting-house  was  used  to  "build  a  school- 
house  and  a  watch-house." 

1  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  26.  ^  Jbid.,  p.  82. 

8  Colls.  Essex  Institute,  vol.  2,  p.  145. 

*For  a  complete  discussion  of  the  Salem  meeting-house,  see  Essex 
Institute,  vol.  2,  p.  145,  and  vol.  39,  p.  216. 


155]  ^^^  CHURCH  155 

There  was  only  one  meeting-house  and  one  ecclesiastical 
organization  in  Watertown  during  the  seventeenth  century. 
Tradition  says  that  there  was  a  meeting-house  there  from 
the  very  first,  and  that  it  stood  east  of  Mount  Auburn. 
However  this  may  be,  a  new  one  was  built  in  1635  at  a  cost 
of  eighty  pounds.  This  was  improved  in  1649  ^Y  adding 
a  gallery,  and  by  1654  had  become  too  small  for  the  con- 
gregation. That  year  the  town,  after  considering  the  ques- 
tion of  repairing  and  enlarging  it,  decided  that  it  would 
be  better  to  build  a  new  one.  This  was  left  to  the  select- 
men, who  were  to  take  the  Cambridge  meeting-house  "  for 
the  pattern  in  all  points.'* 

Seats  in  the  meeting-house  were  assigned  to  the  different 
members  of  the  congregation  by  the  town,  acting  through  the 
elders,  selectmen,  deacons,  or  committees  chosen  for  the  pur- 
pose. Roxbury,  in  1680,  left  the  seating  in  the  meeting- 
house to  the  elders,  deacons  and  selectmen.^  In  1691,  how- 
ever, the  town  meeting  decided  that  a  committee  of  three  be 
appointed  every  year,  in  March,  to  seat  people  in  the  meet- 
ing house.  ^  But,  in  1692,  the  town  returned  to  the  original 
plan  of  allowing  the  selectmen  and  church  officials  to  do 
this.^  Cambridge,  in  1658,  voted  that  "the  Elders,  Dea- 
cons, and  Selectmen  for  the  time  being  shall  be  a  constant 
and  settled  power  for  regulating  the  seating  of  persons  in 
the  meeting-house."  *  In  Salem,  the  selectmen  usually  as- 
signed the  pews,  "  to  continue  during  the  town's  pleasure." 
One  seat  was  always  kept  for  the  magistrates,  called  after 
them  the  magistrates'  seat.  Watertown  allowed  the  deacons, 
and  others  appointed  by  the  town  for  that  purpose,  to  assign 
the  seats.  In  1656  the  order  in  which  they  were  assigned 
was  determined  by  the  following  rules, — "  i.  office.     2.  age. 

1  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  99.  ^  Ibid.,  p.  149. 

8  Ihid.,  p.  153.  *  Salem  Town  Records,  p.  127. 


156  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [156 

3.  State.  4.  gifts."  '  Those  not  taking  the  seats  assigned 
them  were  fined  "  two  shillings  six  pence  for  every  defect 
and  the  constable  to  receive  it."  ^ 

However,  Watertown,  in  1663  appointed  a  committee  to 
"  order  the  setting  of  people  in  the  meeting-house."  ^  This 
committee  '*  made  their  return  of  what  they  had  jointly 
agreed  upon  "  to  the  town  meeting,  by  which  body  it  was 
accepted.*  Every  one  was  ordered  to  take  the  seat  ap- 
pointed him  on  the  following  Sunday.  Persons  who  re- 
fused to  do  so  were  visited  with  a  reproof  from  the  deacon, 
and  on  a  second  offense  they  were  fined  two  shillings  six 
pence. ^  After  this  a  standing  committee  had  the  matter  in 
charge.^ 

Though  the  meeting-house  was  a  public  building  under 
the  control  of  the  town,  permission  was  occasionally  given 
private  individuals  to  make  additions  to  it,  such  as  galleries 
or  pews.  Cambridge,  in  1660,  granted  liberty  to  "  Sundry 
young  men  ...  to  build  a  gallery  on  the  South  beam,  on  con- 
dition that  they  should  not  dispose  of  their  seats  therein  to 
any  other,  but  leave  them  to  the  order  of  those  that  are  ap- 
pointed to  regulate  the  sitting  of  persons  in  the  meeting- 
house." ^  The  selectmen  of  this  town,  in  1673,  allowed 
twelve  men  "  to  build  a  gallery  upon  the  beam  from  the 
gallery  on  the  east  beam  to  the  west  end  of  the  meeting- 
house so  far  as  the  roofe  did  not  hinder  and  to  make  it  like 
that  on  the  east  end . .  and  make  a  pair  of  stairs  to  it . .  and 
if  it  appear  that  there  was  more  room  than  for  those  twelve 
expressed  that  then  the  selectmen  should  place  in  there 
whom  they  pleased."     Dorchester,   in  1678,  granted  per- 

1  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  47.  ^  Jbid.,  pp.  58  and  59. 
3  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  78.  *  Ibid.,  p.  80. 

«  Ibid.,  p.  81.  »  Ibid.,  p.  84. 

^  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  134. 


157]  THE  CHURCH  1 57 

mission  to  several  men  "  to  build  a  seat  in  the  new  meeting- 
house," and,  in  1665,  called  to  account  those  persons  who 
had  *'  lately  set  up  a  new  gallery  in  the  Meeting-house  .  .  . 
without  leave  from  the  town  or  the  Selectmen,"  saying  it 
cut  off  the  light/  As  a  punishment  for  building  without 
the  necessary  permission,  none  of  the  offenders  were  allowed 
to  sit  in  the  gallery  until  the  town's  pleasure  was  ascer- 
tained. Permission  to  enjoy  their  new  seat  was  granted 
them  after  due  acknowledgement  on  their  part  that  they  had 
done  wrong  in  making  the  seat  "  without  more  clear  and 
full  approbation  of  the  town  and  Selectmen  thereof,"  and 
after  promising  that,  if  the  seat  should  be  allowed  them,  they 
would  not  "  give  up  or  sell  any  of  their  places  in  that  seat 
to  any  person  or  persons,  but  whom  the  Elders  should  ap- 
prove of,  or  such  as  should  have  power  to  place  men  in 
seats  in  the  assembly."  ^ 

In  a  Massachusetts  town  of  the  seventeenth  century,  the 
minister  was  a  man  of  the  utmost  importance,  and  was 
treated  with  the  greatest  respect  and  deference  by  all.  A 
few  illustrations  of  this  feeling  have  found  their  way  into 
the  town  records.  Cambridge,  in  1671,  held  a  joint  meet- 
ing "  of  the  church  and  town  "  on  July  17th  "  to  acknowl- 
edge thankfullness  to  Mr.  Oakes  for  his  great  love,  and 
self-denial  in  parting  with  his  friends  and  concerns  in 
England  to  come  over  to  us ;  to  manifest  unto  him  the  con- 
tinuance of  the  earnest  and  affectionate  desires  of  the  Church 
and  people  that  as  soon  as  well  may  be  he  would  please  to 
join  in  fellowship  heer  in  order  to  his  settlement  and  be- 
coming a  pastor  to  this  Church ;  ...  to  intreat  him  forth- 
with to  remove  himself  and  family  into  the  house  prepared 
for  the  ministry;  to  instruct  the  deacons  to  furnish  and  to 
provide  for  his  accomadation  at  the  charge  of  the  church 

^Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  229.  ^ Ibid.,   p.  127. 


158  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [i^g 

and  town  and  to  distribute  the  same  seasonably  for  the 
comfort  of  him  and  his  family;  and  to  order  that  half  a 
year's  payment  forthwith  be  made  by  every  one  according 
to  this  yearly  payment  to  the  ministry."  ^  Dorchester,  in 
1669,  voted  in  town-meeting  to  grant  Mr.  Timothy  Mather 
"  ten  pounds  towards  the  funeral  expenses  and  the  erecting 
of  a  pilar  on  his  father's  tomb."  ^ 

Religious  instruction  in  these  towns  was  not  confined  to 
stated  places  or  times,  nor  was  man,  woman,  or  child  al- 
lowed to  decide  whether  or  not  he  wished  to  be  instructed 
in  church  doctrine.  The  arm  of  the  church  followed  every 
one  every  where,  and  any  failure  to  conform  to  its  teachings 
or  to  neglect  its  service  brought  upon  the  offender  a  penalty 
imposed  by  the  civil  power.  In  order  to  enforce  re- 
ligious discipline  and  to  see  that  the  inhabitants  were  prop- 
erly instructed  in  the  truth,  a  town  was  often  divided  into 
districts,  each  of  which  was  entrusted  to  one  of  the  deacons 
or  selectmen,  whose  duty  it  was  to  see  that  every  inhabitant 
conformed  to  these  requirements.  In  1660  the  selectmen 
of  Watertown  "  agreed  (in  reference  to  the  well  ordering  of 
the  inhabitants  of  Watertown,)  that  the  Selectmen  should 
divide  themselves  and  take  a  survey  of  the  several  families, 
and  take  notice  ...  of  their  improvement  of  their  times  both 
concerning  their  souls,  as  of  their  bodies;"  ®  and,  in  1674, 
they  appointed  three  men  to  "  go  about  the  town  to  see  that 
the  children  were  taught  to  read  the  English  tongue  and 
that  they  were  taught  some  orthodox  catechism."  *  The 
young  people  of  the  town  were  frequently  gathered  to- 
gether by  the  pastor  in  the  meeting-house,  or  were  called 
by  an  elder  to  some  public  place  and  there  catechised.    None 

^  Cambridge  Town  Records,  pp.  195,  196. 

2  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  162. 

3  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  70.  *  Ibid.,  p.  121. 


159]  T'HE  CHURCH  159 

could  escape  the  ordeal ;  "  all  youths  from  ten  years  old  unto 
twenty  years  old  "  were  included.^  In  1681  the  town  of 
Dorchester  "  did  by  vote  desire  Elder  Humphry  to  cate- 
chise the  youth  and  children  that  he  should  call  to  him  when 
and  where  he  should  appoint."  ^  Cambridge  sent  men  by 
twos  and  threes  throughout  the  town  to  catechise  the  youth. 
In  1668  and  1670  the  town  ordered  eighteen  men  to  go 
about  for  the  purpose  of  "  catechiseing  the  youth  of  this 
town."  ^  The  parents  of  those  children  whom  this  catechiz- 
ing found  deficient  were  called  before  the  selectmen  to 
answer  for  their  failure  to  properly  instruct  their  children. 
In  Dorchester,  in  1675,  "  John  Pope  appeared  before  the 
Selectmen  to  give  an  account  of  the  education  of  his  children 
by  way  of  catechising  who  promised  to  endeauor  for  time 
to  come  to  be  more  diligent  that  way  to  attain  instruction 
for  them."  *  And,  in  1671,  the  selectmen  agreed  that  a 
warrant  should  be  directed  to  the  constable  to  summon  Tim- 
othy Wales  and  his  wife  and  his  two  smaller  boys  to  appear 
before  the  selectmen  at  their  next  meeting,  to  be  ques- 
tioned as  to  "  the  way  they  were  being  educated."  ^  The 
selectmen  of  Watertown,  in  1660,  reported  that  they  had 
taken  "  a  survey  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  town  with  refer- 
ence to  the  answering  of  that  law  which  required  the  learn- 
ing of  some  catechism;"®  and,  in  1674,  the  selectmen  ap- 
pointed two  men  to  see  that  the  children  were  taught  some 
catechism. 

Attendance  upon  church  was  compulsory.     Cambridge, 
in  1669,  "  upon  the  complaint  of  some  of  idleness  and  care- 

1  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  137. 

^Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  255. 

3  Cambridge  Town  Records,  pp.  175,  188. 

*  Dorchester  Town  Records,  pp.  200,  209.         ^  Ibid.,  p.  181. 

«  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  71. 


l6o  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [i6o 

lessness  of  sundry  persons  in  the  time  of  public  worship," 
ordered  the  constables  to  "  set  a  watch  of  one  man  during 
the  time  of  public  worship,  one  in  the  forenoon  and  another 
in  the  afternoon  to  look  after  such  persons  that  they  do  at- 
tend upon  the  public  worship  of  God."  ^  The  town  ap- 
pointed certain  men,  "  to  look  to  the  youth  in  time  of  public 
worship  .  .  .  and  to  inform  against  such  as  he  found  disor- 
derly." ^  Dorchester  appointed  men  "  to  look  after  the 
boys  in  the  meeting-house  on  the  Lord's  day  .  .  .  each  to  take 
the  care  of  the  boys'  orderly  behavior  in  the  public  meeting, 
each  of  them  a  quarter  of  a  year."  ^  This  was  the  more 
easily  done,  since  all  the  boys  of  Dorchester  were  seated  to- 
gether in  the  west  gallery,  which  the  town  ordered  in  1667 
"  to  be  brought  into  such  a  form  that  all  these  boys  may  be 
there  seated  and  so  ordered  that  they  may  be  prevented  from 
profaning  the  Lord's  day."  * 

Not  only  were  the  parents  required  to  teach  the  children 
the  catechism  but  they  were  also  expected  to  see  that  all  their 
servants  were  instructed  in  its  truths.  Dorchester,  in  1665, 
ordered  "  all  masters  and  any  that  have  the  charge  and 
oversight  of  any  youth  within  the  Plantation  to  be  diligent 
to  observe  this  injunction  to  catechize  their  servants  and 
others  within  there  several  charge  in  some  sound  and  or- 
thodox catechism  that  they  might  be  able  to  render  an 
account  thereof  when  they  should  be  hereunto  required 
either  in  the  Church  or  privatly  as  upon  advice  shall  be 
judged  most  conducing  to  the  generall  good  of  all  men."  ^ 

1  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  178.  ^  7^/^/.,  p.  164. 

8  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  230. 

*  Ibid.,  p.  146.  *  Ibid.,  p.  73- 


CHAPTER  VII 

The  Schools 

As  was  natural  in  a  colony  whose  very  existence  de- 
pended upon  teaching  the  coming  generation  the  funda- 
mental truths  upon  which  the  colony  was  founded,  Massa- 
chusett§__pmd- -great. attention^  to  the  educatioa  of  the.  chil- 
dren. "After  God  had  carried  us  safe  to  New  England," 
said  one  old  settler,  "  and  we  had  builded  our  houses,  pro- 
vided necessaries  for  our  livelihood,  reared  convenient  places 
for  God's  worship,  and  settled  the  civil  government,  one  of 
the  next  things  we  longed  for  and  looked  after,  was  to  ad- 
vance learning,  and  to  perpetuate  it  to  posterity;  dreading 
to  leave  an  illiterate  ministry  to  the  churches,  when  our 
present  ministers  shall  be  in  the  dust."  ^  This,  like  the 
religious  system,  wjs^not  a  private  but  a  pyhllc,  a  Qolopi^l 
and  municipal,  affair.  The  choice  oi^ a, schoolmaster,  the 
salary  to  be  paid  him,  the  locadgn  gl.the_sj±ooLh,O.Use,  and 
its  need  of  repairs,  the  subjects  to_be Jaiaght,  and  the  hours 
for  the  school  sessions  were  all  discussed  and  settled  in 
town  meeting.  Parents^  were  required  by  law  to  send  their 
children  to  school,  and  those  not  complying  were  called 
before  the  selectmen  to  answer  for  "  not  learning  their 
Children  to  read  the  English  tongue,"  ^  while  to  enforce 
this  order  the  selectmen  made  house-to-house  visitations, 
"  to  make  trial  whether  children  and  servants  be  educated 

1  New  England  First  Fruits,  p.  12. 

2  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  103. 

161]  161 


l62  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [162 

in  learning  to  read  the  English  tongue  and  in  the  knowl- 
edge of  the  capital  laws  according  to  the  law  of  the 
country."  ^ 

Schools  were  freCj,. in  the  sense  j^hiaL.  any .  one  juight  at- 
tend  them,  but  not  in  the  sense  that  the  pupils  paid  no 
tuition.  On  the  contrary  each  pupil  paid,  if  able  to  do  so, 
but  none  were  excluded  through  inability  to  pay,  as  in  this 
case,  the  town  made  up  the  deficiency  from  the  town  rate. 
In  an  order  passed  by  the  General  Court,  in  1647,  estab- 
lishing certain  schools,  it  said,  "  the  wages," — of  the 
teacher, — "  shall  be  paid  either  by  the  parents  or  masters 
of  such  children "  as  attended  school  "  or  by  the  in- 
habitants in  generall."  ^  Salem,  in  a  town  meeting,  Sep- 
tember 30th,  1634,  ordered  a  note  "  published  on  the  next 
lecture  day  that  such  as  had  children  to  be  kept  at  school 
would  bring  in  their  names  and  what  they  will  give  for  one 
whole  year,  and  also  if  any  poor  body  hath  children  or  a 
child  to  be  put  to  school  and  not  able  to  pay  for  their  school 
that  the  town  will  pay  it  by  a  rate."  This  continued  to  be 
the  rule  in  Salem  until  1768.^  In  1674  each  child  that  was 
able  paid  "  five  pence  at  the  grammar  school,"  and  in  1677, 
twelve  pence. 

In  Watertown  the  amount  of  tuition  paid  depended  upon 
the  subjects  studied,  the  pupils  studying  English  paying  only 
three  pence  per  week,  while  those  learning  to  write  Latin 
paid  four  pence.  All  the  tuition  went  toward  paying  the 
teacher's  salary^  and,  as  attendance  at  school  was  very  ir- 
regular, the  teacher  was  required  to  "  keep  a  strict  account 
of  the  number  of  weeks  that  every  one  doth  continue,"  and 
to  send  bills  twice  yearly  to  those  having  children  in  attend- 
ance.    If  these  were  not  paid  within  a  reasonable  time,  the 

1  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  104.     2  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  2,  p.  203. 
8  Felt,  Annals  of  Salem,  vol.  i,  p.  428. 


163]  THE  SCHOOLS  163 

schoolmaster  reported  the  matter  to  the  selectmen,  who 
were  "  required  to  take  some  speedy  course  "  to  secure  him 
his  due.^  If  the  tuition  paid  in  failed  to  reach  thirty 
pounds  or  whatever  amount  was  specified  for  the  teacher's 
salary,  the  deficiency  was  made  up  by  the  town  through  a 
rate  levied  for  that  purpose.  Out-of-town  pupils  paid  larger 
tuition.  In  1663  they  paid  twenty-five  shillings  per  year,^ 
three  pounds  of  which  amount  was  added  to  the  teacher's 
salary,  while  all  the  remainder  went  to  the  town.^  How- 
ever, in  1667,  Watertown  changed  its  educational  system. 
After  that  year  the  school  was  free  to  the  children  of  all 
the  "  settled  inhabitants,"  only  those  from  a  distance  con- 
tinuing to  pay  and  their  tuition  being  used  exclusively  for 
the  teacher's  salary.  The  town  was  now  responsible  only 
for  that  deficiency  in  the  teacher's  salary  which  remained 
after  the  out-of-town  pupils  had  paid.  This  it  made  up  as 
before  by  a  town  rate.*  In  addition  to  the  tuition  required, 
parents  having  children  in  the  school  were  frequently  com- 
pelled to  provide  wood  for  the  use  of  the  school.  In  1670, 
to  prevent  the  school  from  closing  on  account  of  the  cold, 
the  selectmen  of  Watertown  ordered  every  inhabitant  hav- 
ing a  child  in  the  school  to  send  there  a  quarter  of  a  cord 
of  wood  by  December  15th,  or,  if  they  failed  to  send  the 
wood,  to  send  two  pence  to  buy  it.^  If  this  order 
were  not  obeyed,  the  child  of  the  delinquent  parents 
could  not  attend  school  from  November  until  April.* 
This  was  also  the  rule  in  Dorchester.  That  town  or- 
dered "  in  respect  to  the  school,  that  those  that  send  their 
children  to  school  should  in  the  winter  time  bring  for  each 
child  a  load  of  wood  or  half  a  cord  of  wood,"  and  those  that 


93,  96,  102. 


1  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  26. 

2  Ibid., 

P-  34. 

8  Ibid.,  p.  36. 

*  Ibid., 

pp.  91 

« Ibid.,  p.  103. 

« Ibid., 

p.  no 

l64  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [164 

brought  it  in  the  form  of  logs  should  cut  it  after  it  come  to 
the  school  house,  and  for  those  boys  that  went  but  a  part  of 
the  winter  the  masters  "  should  appoint  the  proportion  for 
such."  ^  Dorchester  also  required  that  tuition  should 
be  paid  by  those  attending  school.  In  1658  the  selectmen 
ordered  a  Mr.  Patten  to  *'  looke  up  what  notes  and  papers 
he  hath  that  concerns  the  accounts  of  the  scholars  for  the 
two  years  past  and  bring  them  to  the  selectmen."  ^  Upon 
receiving  these,  the  selectmen  issued  a  warrant  to  the  con- 
stable to  gather  from  those  parents  and  masters  that  sent 
their  children  or  servants  to  the  free  school  those  sums  that 
were  in  his  list.^  Cambridge  also  required  its  pupils  to 
pay  if  able  and,  as  in  Watertown,  the  town  made  up  any 
deficiency  in  the  teacher's  salary.  In  1662  the  townsmen 
paid  Mr.  Corlett,  the  teacher  at  that  time,  out  of  the  public 
stock  of  the  town  ten  pounds  "  on  account  of  his  present 
necessities  and  by  reason  of  the  fewness  of  his  scholars."  * 
But  Cambridge  apparently  paid  the  teacher  by  raising  a 
rate  for  that  purpose  more  frequently  than  did  the  other 
towns.  In  1648,  "  it  was  agreed  at  a  meeting  of  the  whole 
town,  that  there  should  be  lands  sold  of  the  Common  for  the 
gratifying  of  Mr.  Corlet,  for  his  pains  in  keeping  a  school 
in  the  Town,"  and  in  1654  the  town  levied  twenty  pounds 
upon  the  several  inhabitants  for  the  same  purpose.^  In 
1 69 1  it  was  agreed  that  there  "  should  be  given  by  the  town 
in  Common  pay  annually  to  a  schoolmaster  twelve  pound." 

Education,  however,  was  considered  such  a  vital  matter 
that  many  towns  as  corporate  bodies  sought  to  provide  it 
for  all  those  who  could  not  pay.  There  were  two  principal 
ways  of  doing  this, — either  some  town  land  was  set  aside, 

^Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  151.  ^ Ibid.,  p.  94. 

8  Ibid.,  p.  96.  *  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  138. 

6  Ibid.,  pp.  77,  293,  296. 


165]  THE  SCHOOLS  165 

the  income  from  which  must  be  used  for  the  support  of  the 
school  and  the  schoolmoster,  or  "  every  inhabitant  bound 
some  house  or  land  for  a  year's  allowance  forever  "  for 
this  purpose/  Roxbury,  "  not  being  able  to  live  quietly 
without  a  free  school,"  ^  adopted  the  method  last  mentioned 
immediately  after  its  founding.  About  sixty  of  its  in- 
habitants, i.  e.  practically  all  the  town,  agreed  in  the 
early  years  of  the  town  to  form  a  school,  and  each  one  of 
those  so  agreeing,  "  gave  a  small  rent  forever  out  of  their 
several  habitations  and  homesteads,"  making  at  the  same 
time  a  perpetual  succession  of  officers  called  "  feoffees  "  to 
gather  and  impress  this  rate.^  This  was  collected  for  years 
without  any  difficulty,  but  trouble  arose  later  over  the 
amount  to  be  collected,  as  the  book  and  charter  containing 
the  original  agreement  was  lost  and  the  feoffees  could  not 
estimate  what  was  due  the  town  nor  what  proportion  each 
inhabitant  should  pay.  They,  therefore,  petitioned  the 
General  Court,  in  1669,  to  ratify  and  confirm  the  school's 
title  to  certain  habitations  and  homesteads,  and  to  empower 
the  feoffees  to  gather  the  rent  from  these.*  The  income 
from  this  source  not  proving  adequate  for  the  support  of 
the  school,  the  town  also  adopted  the  second  plan  mentioned 
above,  i.  e.  setting  aside  some  land  for  the  use  of  the 
school.  In  1660  500  acres  were  thus  granted  "  the  Rox- 
bury Free  School,"  which  grant  was  confirmed  in  i/iS.*^ 
Dorchester  relied  upon  the  rent  obtained  from  Thomson's 
Island  for  the  maintenance  of  its  school.  This  was  an 
island  in  Boston  harbor,  settled  by  David  Thomson  in 
1626  but  taken  from  his  son  and  given  to  Dorchester  by 

1  Savage,  Winthrop,  vol.  2,  p.  264.  ^  Magnalia,  vol.  i,  p.  498. 

3  Mass.  Arch.,  vol.  58,  p.  63.  *  Ibid. 

«  Mass.  Arch.,  vol.  5,  p.  16.    Here  a  map  of  the  grant  is  given.    Mass. 
Col.  Rec.y  vol.  4,  pt.  I,  p.  438. 


l66  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [i66 

the  General  Court  in  1634.  As  early  as  1639,  when  a 
school  is  first  mentioned  in  the  Dorchester  records,  twenty 
pounds  was  levied  upon  those  owning  property  in  Thom- 
son's Island  for  the  use  of  the  school,  the  said  twenty 
pounds  to  be  the  salary  of  the  schoolmaster.  In  1641  the 
elders,  Mr.  Stoughton  and  Mr.  Glover,  were  entrusted  by 
the  town  to  rent  "  Tomson's  Island  "  for  the  best  benefit 
of  the  school,^  and  the  seventh  day  of  the  twelfth  month 
of  that  same  year,  1641,  the  inhabitants  of  Dorchester  set 
aside  the  island  for  the  use  of  the  town  forever.  This  was 
found  necessary,  owing  to  the  great  labor  and  difficulty  ex- 
perienced in  collecting  the  rent  from  "  so  many  several 
persons  as  ought  to  pay  according  to  their  several  propor- 
tions," this  number  being  no  less  than  "  six  score  or  there- 
about "  and,  also,  because  the  rent  of  twenty  pounds,  even 
when  collected,' was  not  of  itself  sufficient  maintenance  for 
the  school.  Therefore,  all  the  inhabitants  of  Dorchester 
agreed  for  "  themselves  and  their  heirs  "  that  from  hence- 
forth the  said  island  and  all  the  "  benefits  and  profits  thereof 
and  all  their  rights  and  interests  in  the  same  should  be 
wholly  and  forever  bequeathed  and  given  away  from  them- 
selves and  their  heirs  unto  the  town  of  Dorchester  for  the 
instructing  and  teaching  of  children  and  youth  in  good  liter- 
ature and  learning."  The  money  from  the  island  was  raised 
by  renting  out  all  the  land  there  for  such  yearly  rents  as 
amounted  in  the  common  estimation  to  the  full  value  of  the 
said  island.  Every  one  wishing  to  rent  land  there  was 
compelled  to  secure  the  payment  of  the  rent  thereof  by 
land  or  otherwise  before  the  privilege  was  granted  him. 
The  number  of  tenants  was  restricted  to  ten,  in  order  to 
avoid  all  trouble  in  collecting  the  rent.  If  any  vacancy 
occurred  in  the  school,  the  rents  from  the  island  could  not 

1  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  44. 


167]  THE  SCHOOLS  i(^y 

be  used  for  any  other  purpose,  but  must  be  put  aside  to 
"  augment  the  stipend  "  when  the  vacancy  was  filled  or 
for  some  other  school  use.^ 

The  agreement,  however,  did  not  long  affect  Dorchester, 
for  in  1648  the  island  was  given  back  to  the  younger  Thom- 
son, who,  since  its  grant  to  Dorchester  in  1634,  had  been 
trying  to  induce  the  General  Court  to  return  it  to  him.  Dor- 
chester did  not  give  up  her  claim  to  the  island  without  a 
struggle,  but,  after  hearing  her  side  of  the  case,  the  General 
Court  decided  in  favor  of  Thomson.^  Thereupon,  Dor- 
chester demanded  compensation  and  the  General  Court  gave 
the  town  1,000  acres  of  land  in  place  of  the  island.  This, 
however,  did  not  satisfy  the  town,  which  continued  its  ef- 
forts to  regain  the  island,  voting  as  late  as  1659  "  that  the 
inhabitants  would  have  a  trial  at  the  charge  of  the  town 
for  to  get  Tomson's  Island  for  the  town  of  Dorchester  as 
they  supposed  that  it  is  theirs  by  right  and  it  was  also  voted 
the  same  day  that  the  selectmen  are  desired  and  impowered 
to  prosecute  the  trial  in  the  best  way  and  manner  as  they 
shall  think  best  and  most  convenient  for  the  obtaining  of 
it."  ^  This  attempt  was  unsuccessful,  and  Thomson's  island 
was  not  given  back  to  Dorchester,  that  town  contenting 
itself  with  the  gift  of  1,000  acres  made  it  by  the  General 
Court.  This  land  became  known  as  the  school  farm.  It 
was  carefully  tended  by  the  town  and  in  1667,  by  vote  of 
the  entire  town,  was  set  aside  "  for  the  maintenance  of  a 
free  schole  in  Dorchester  forever."  * 

Cambridge  also  set  aside  common  land,  the  income  from 
which  was  used  for  the  support  of  the  school.  The  Gen- 
eral Court,  in  1659,  gave  that  town  1,000  acres  for  this 
purpose.  ° 

1  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  45.     2  Mass.  Coll.  Rec,  vol.  2,  p.  245. 
*  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  96 .     *  Ibid.,  p.  146. 
5  Mass.  Col.  Rec,  vol.  5,  pt.  i,  p.  400. 


l68  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [i68 

It  was  customary  for  the  town,  either  directly  or  through 
the  selectmen,  to  attend  to  all  school  affairs.  Nothing  con- 
nected with  the  school  was  too  trivial  to  bring  to  the  notice 
of  the  town.  It  was  deeply  interested  in  the  choice  of  the 
schoolmaster  and,  though  it  often  entrusted  this  temporarily 
to  the  selectmen,  it  never  resigned  the  power  of  appointing  to 
this  position.  The  selectmen  of  Watertown,  in  1650,  made 
this  agreement  with  the  schoolmaster, — "  it  was  voted  and 
agreed  that  Mr.  Richard  Norcross  was  chosen  school- 
master, for  the  teaching  of  children  to  read  and  write  and 
so  much  of  Latin,  according  to  an  order  of  Court,  and  also 
if  any  of  the  said  town  have  any  maidens  that  have  a  desire 
to  learn  to  write  that  the  said  Richard  should  attend  them 
for  the  learning  of  them,  and  also  that  he  teach  such  as  de- 
sire to  cast  accounts,  and  that  the  town  should  allow  the 
said  Richard  for  his  imployment  thirty  pounds  for  this 
year;"  ^  but,  in  1675,  the  town  meeting  engaged  the  teacher 
to  keep  school  for  one  year  at  the  same  salary — thirty 
pounds — and  a  "fortnight's  time  in  hay  time."  ^  The  select- 
men of  Watertown,  however,  usually  made  the  agreement 
with  the  teacher.  In  1674  they  empowered  one  of  their 
members  to  treat  with  Mr.  Goddard  about  keeping  school, 
and  in  1678  they  dismissed  the  teacher  "  as  they  had 
agreed  with  another  to  keep  the  school."  The  town  meet- 
ing of  Salem,  in  1640,  chose  the  teacher  but,  in  1670,  a  gen- 
eral town  meeting  called  to  consider  about  engaging  a 
grammar  school  master,  ordered  the  selectmen  to  "  take 
care  to  provide  one  and  to  agree  with  him  for  his  main- 
tenance." *  Instances  similar  to  these  could  be  given  in- 
definitely. 

The  only  deviation  from  this  rule  about  the  management 

^Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  21.  ^  Ibid.,  p.  123. 

»  Felt,  Annals  of  Salem,  vol.  i,  p.  432. 


169]  THE  SCHOOLS  169 

of  the  schools  is  found  in  Roxbury  and  Dorchester,  in 
which  towns  the  first  signs  of  regular  school  boards  are 
found.  In  the  former  town  a  body  of  men  called 
"  Foeffees  "  was  appointed  to  manage  the  school.  This  was 
a  perpetual  board,  whose  chief  duty  was  to  gather  the  rate 
promised  by  the  original  sixty  families  for  the  use  of  the 
school  and  the  additional  rate  raised  by  the  town.^  These 
officers  are  not  very  often  mentioned  in  the  Roxbury  Re- 
cords and  I  can  find  no  definite  statement  of  their  duties, 
though,  in  1666,  they  were  appointed  to  join  with  the  select- 
men in  choosing  a  convenient  place  for  the  school  house, 
showing  that  their  duties  were  not  confined  to  gathering 
the  rate.  In  Dorchester  the  records  of  the  school  board  are 
more  complete,  and  it  is  possible  to  gain  a  very  adequate 
idea  of  their  powers  and  duties.  In  1645  the  inhabitants 
of  Dorchester  adopted  the  following  rules  and  orders  con- 
cerning the  managment  of  the  school : 

First  it  was  ordered  that  three  able  and  sufficient  men 
of  the  Plantation  should  be  chosen  to  be  wardens  or  over- 
seers of  the  school.  These  should  have  the  charge  and 
ordering  of  the  school  and  of  all  things  concerning  it  in 
such  manner  as  was  afterward  expressed  and  should  con- 
tinue in  their  office  and  place  for  the  term  of  their  lives 
respectively,  "  unless,  by  reason  of  any  of  them  removing 
his  habitation  out  of  the  towne,  or,  for  any  other  weighty 
reason,  the  inhabitants  should  see  cause  to  elect  or  choose 
others  in  their  room  in  which  cases,  and  upon  the  death 
of  any  of  the  said  wardens,  the  inhabitants  should  make  a 
new  election  and  choice  of  others." 

Secondly,  these  Wardens  should  have  full  power  to  dis- 
pose of  the  school  stock,  "  whether  the  same  be  in  land  or 
otherwise,  both  such  as  is  already  in  being  and  such  as  may 
by  any  good  means  hereafter  be  added,"  and  they  should 
1  Mass.  Arch.,  vol.  58,  p.  63. 


lyo  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [170 

collect  and  receive  the  rents,  and  profits  "  arising  and  grow- 
ing of  and  from  the  said  stock,"  which  they  "  should  imploy 
and  lay  out  only  for  the  best  behoof,  and  advantage  of  the 
said  school  and  the  furtherance  of  learning  thereby,  and 
should  give  a  faithful  and  true  account  of  their  receipts  and 
disbursements  so  often  as  they  might  be  required  by  the  in- 
habitants or  the  major  part  of  them." 

Thirdly,  the  said  Wardens  should  take  "  care  and  do 
their  utmost  and  best  endeavor  that  the  said  schools  were 
from  time  to  time  supplied  with  an  able  and  sufficient 
schoolmaster,  who  nevertheless  was  not  to  be  admitted  into 
the  place  of  schoolmaster  without  the  general  consent  of  the 
inhabitants  or  the  major  part  of  them." 

Fourthly,  as  often  as  the  said  school  was  supplied 
with  a  schoolmaster,  the  wardens  should  from  time  to  time 
pay  or  cause  to  be  paid  unto  the  said  schoolmaster  such 
wages  out  of  the  rents  and  profits  of  the  school  stock  as 
should  come  due  to  be  paid. 

Fifthly,  the  said  wardens  should  from  time  to  time  see 
that  the  school  house  was  kept  in  good  and  sufficient  repair, 
the  charge  of  which  was  to  be  defrayed  and  paid  out  of  the 
rents  of  the  school  stock,  if  they  were  sufficient,  or  else  from 
such  rents  as  might  "  arise  and  grow  in  the  time  of  the 
vacancy  of  the  school  ...  if  there  be  any  such,  and,  in 
defect  of  such  vacancy,  the  wardens  should  repair  to  the 
seven  men  of  the  town  who  should  have  power  to  tax  the 
town  with  such  sums  as  should  be  requisite  for  the  repairing 
of  the  school  house  as  aforesaid." 

Sixthly,  the  said  wardens  were  instructed  to  see  that 
every  year,  at  or  before  the  end  of  the  ninth  month,  there  was 
brought  to  the  schoolhouse  twelve  sufficient  cart-  or  wagon- 
loads  of  wood  for  fuel,  to  be  for  the  use  of  the  school- 
master and  the  scholars  for  the  time  being,  who  should  be 
taxed  for  the  purpose  at  the  discretion  of  the  said  wardens. 


171  ]  THE  SCHOOLS  171 

Lastly,  the  said  wardens  were  to  take  care  that  the 
schoolmaster  for  the  time  being  faithfully  performed  his 
duty  in  his  place,  "  as  a  schoolmaster  ought  to  do  as  well 
in  other  things  as  in  these  which  are  hereafter  expressed," 
viz. : 

First,  that  he  diligently  attended  his  school  and  did  "  his 
utmost  endeavor  for  benefiting  his  scholars  according  to  his 
best  discretion  without  unnecessarily  absenting  himself  to 
the  prejudice  of  his  scholars,  and  hindering  their  learning."  ^ 

Despite  the  complete  powers  given  by  this  document  to 
the  wardens,  they  do  not  seem  to  have  exercised  much 
power  over  the  school  at  Dorchester.  The  selectmen  and 
the  town  meeting  continued  to  engage  the  teacher,  to  super- 
vise the  education  of  the  children,  and  to  see  that  the 
teacher  was  paid.  In  165 1  Deacon  Wiswall,  one  of  the 
wardens  chosen  in  1645,  was  appointed  by  the  town  to  act 
with  the  selectmen  and  a  Mr.  Jones  "  to  treat  and  agree  with 
Mr.  Butler  for  to  teach  schoole."  ^  In  1652,  1660,  1661, 
1670  and  1675,  the  selectmen  again  engaged  the  teacher.® 
In  1666  the  town  meeting  discussed  the  question  of  en- 
gaging the  teacher,  and,  "  after  some  agitation,"  it  was 
decided  to  engage  one  and  to  leave  the  matter  in  the  hands 
of  a  committee,  who  were  "  Master  Mather  and  Lieutenant 
Foster  and  John  Minot."  *  In  1669  the  town  dismissed  the 
teacher  and  again  chose  a  committee — not  the  wardens — 
"  to  look  out  for  and  agree  with  a  schoolmaster  for  to 
teach  school  in  Dorchester."  ^  This  happened  again  in  1682.* 
Moreover,  the  wardens  seem  to  have  taken  no  part  in  pay- 
ing the  teacher  his  salary.  In  1658  the  selectmen  took  this 
matter  in  hand,  asking  one  of  their  number  who  was  not  a 

1  Dorchester  Town  Records,  pp.  54,  55.         ^  ihid.,  p.  304. 
« Ibid.,  pp.  102,  171,  210,  313.  *  Ihid.y  p.  136. 

«  Ihid.,  p.  159.  «  Ibid.,  p.  266. 


172  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [172 

warden  "  to  look  up  what  notes  and  papers  he  hath  that 
concern  the  accounts  of  the  scholars  for  the  two  years,  1656 
and  1657,  and  bring  them  to  the  selectmen."  ^  During  the 
years  mentioned  there  was  nothing  to  prevent  the  three 
wardens  chosen  when  the  agreement  about  the  school  was 
made  from  performing  their  duties,  these  three  men  being 
"  Mr.  Haward,  Deacon  Wiswall,  and  Mr.  Atherton."  They 
were  alive  and  so  prominent  in  town  affairs  that  it  seems 
impossible  that  they  could  have  been  removed  for  any  of 
the  reasons  mentioned  in  the  agreement.  Some  of  the  in- 
stances in  which  these  men  played  a  prominent  part  in  the 
life  of  the  town  may  be  learned  from  the  town  records. 
For  example,  Deacon  Wiswall  was  chosen  in  1653  as  one  of 
the  two  commissioners  to  "  treat  with  a  committee  chosen  by 
the  General  Court  to  view  a  plantation  at  Naticke ;"  ^  in  1665, 
to  "  make  an  agreement  with  two  men  about  renting  some 
meadow  in  Dorchester;  ^  in  1667,  ^s  deputy  to  the  General 
Court;*  in  1662,  to  lay  out  "land  on  both  sides  of  the  river;" 
and,  in  1665,  to  treat  with  the  Indians.*^  The  second  war- 
den, Humphrey  Atherton,  was  captain  or  major  of  the 
town  band,®  and  also  filled  many  other  positions  of  trust. 
In  1649,  ^or  instance,  he  was  one  of  those  who  induced 
Kitchamakin  to  voluntarily  sign  the  indenture  giving  the 
land  upon  which  Dorchester  was  situated  to  the  town; 
while,  in  1658,  1659,  and  1660  he  was  a  selectman.''  He 
died  before  1672,®  and  there  is  no  mention  of  any  one's  be- 
ing chosen  to  fill  his  place,  as  was  enjoined  upon  the 
town  by  the  agreement  in  question.  The  third  warden, 
Mr.   Haward,  is  more  difficult  to  identify.      There  were 

1  Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  94.                *  Ibid.,  p.  68. 

8  Ibid.,  p.  70.  *  Ibid.,  p.  81. 

5  Ibid.,  p.  126.  ®  Ibid.,  pp.  63,  94. 

T  Ibid.,  pp.  93,  98,  102.  » Ibid.,  p.  237. 


173]  ^-^^  SCHOOLS  173 

three  men  of  that  name  prominent  in  Dorchester,  Jona- 
than, Ephraim  and  Robert,  and  it  is  impossible  to  say 
definitely  which  of  these  was  the  warden.  However, 
that  is  unessential,  for  all  were  men  of  standing  in 
the  community;  Robert  being  a  selectmen  in  1652  and 
1653,  ^"d  clerk  of  the  writs  during  Deacon  Wiswall's  ab- 
sence in  Europe  in  1652;^  while  Jonathan  and  Ephraim 
are  frequently  mentioned  in  the  town  records  as  well-known 
citizens. 

From  this  survey  of  the  wardens  and  their  activity  in 
school  matters  and  of  the  attention  still  paid  to  the  school 
by  the  selectmen  and  the  town,  it  seems  probable  that  the 
latter  had  fully  as  much  control  over  education  in  Dor- 
chester as  did  the  selectmen  and  town  anywhere  else  in 
Massachusetts.  This,  however,  may  not  be  so  in  the  matter 
of  repairing  the  school  house  and  attending  to  the  school 
funds.  Over  these  the  wardens  seem  to  have  exercised  full 
control,  for  questions  concerning  them  were  never  discussed 
in  the  town  meetings  or  in  the  selectmen's  meeting,  except 
when  additional  money  was  needed,  which  the  selectmen 
were  required  to  furnish  by  a  rate.  This  happened  fre- 
quently. The  "  school  stock  "  of  Dorchester  was  evidently 
not  sufficient  to  meet  the  needs  of  the  school,  and  the  select- 
men frequently  authorized  the  levying  of  a  school  rate.^ 
In  1686  17  pounds  were  raised,^  in  1682,  thirty-two  pounds 
"  for  the  use  of  the  town  and  to  pay  for  the  school  master's 
diet;"*  and,  in  1670,  forty-five  pounds  for  the  town  and 
school.''  There  is  also  an  indication  that  the  sole  control 
of  the  school  fund  remained  in  the  hands  of  the  wardens, 
in  an  entry  in  1680  which  says  "  Lieutenant  Capen  and 
William  Summer   (feoffees  for  the  school  land  and  min- 

1  Dorchester  Town  Records,  pp.  62,  313. 

2  Ibid.,  pp.  271,  267.  3  iijid,^  p.  280. 
*  Ihid.,  p.  267.                                             6  Ibid.^  p.  264. 


174  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [174 

istry  land)  asked  to  be  dismissed  from  that  work."  This 
was  granted  and  others  were  chosen  for  the  position/ 

From  the  accounts  given  in  the  town  records,  it  is  rather 
difficult  to  determine  the  exact  character  of  the  schools  in 
these  towns.  The  colony  required  each  town  of  fifty  fami- 
lies to  have  a  school  where  reading  and  writing  were 
taught,  and  each  town  of  one  hundred  families  to  add  to 
this  curriculum  the  study  of  Latin.  As  has  been  said, 
the  entire  management  of  the  school  was  supervised  by  the 
town,  and  while  these  towns  paid  great  attention  to  the 
selection  of  a  teacher  and  while  they  forced  the  people  to 
attend  the  school,  the  question  of  a  curriculum  does  not 
seem  to  have  troubled  them  at  all.  They  relied  upon  the 
judgment  of  the  General  Court  in  choosing  reading,  writ- 
ing and  Latin  as  the  subjects  best  suited  for  a  complete 
education  and  troubled  themselves  very  little  about  any- 
thing further. 

In  Watertown,  in  1650,  the  teacher  was  engaged  to 
teach  the  children  of  the  town,  both  boys  and  girls,  at  the 
meeting  house.  In  165 1  he  was  "to  use  his  best  indeav- 
ors  to  instruct  all  such  persons  as  shall  be  sent  unto  him  in 
English,  writing,  or  Latin  according  to  the  capacity  of  the 
persons;"  and  again,  in  1678,  the  teacher  was  to  teach 
Latin  and  English  except  during  May,  June,  July,  and  Au- 
gust, during  which  time  he  was  to  teach  "  only  Latin  pupils 
and  writers  and  them  at  his  own  house."  The  meeting  place 
was  changed  later  and  the  school  house  was  used  all  the  year. 
This  regulation  about  studies  existed  in  Watertown  for 
years. 

Dorchester  required  its  teacher  "  to  diligently  instruct 
such  as  shall  be  committed  to  him  as  they  shall  be  able  to 
learn  both  in  humane  learning,  and  good  literature,  and 

"^Dorchester  Town  Records,  p.  251. 


175]  THE  SCHOOLS  175 

likewise  in  point  of  good  manners,  and  dutiful  behaviour 
towards  all  specially  their  superiors  as  they  shall  have  oc- 
casion to  be  in  their  presence  whether  by  meeting  in  the 
street  or  otherwise."  ^  In  1655  Dorchester  added  to  this 
curriculum  Greek  and  writing.  Cambridge,  in  1691,  re- 
quired its  teacher  to  teach  Latin,  English,  writing  and 
"  to  cipher."  Dorchester,  in  1665,  made  elaborate  rules 
to  guide  its  schoolmaster; — from  the  beginning  of  the  first 
month  until  the  end  of  the  seventh  he  should  begin  to 
teach  at  seven  o'clock  in  the  morning  and  dismiss  his  schol- 
ars at  five  in  the  afternoon,  and  for  the  other  five  months 
— that  is  from  the  beginning  of  the  eighth  month,  until  the 
end  of  the  twelfth — he  should  begin  at  eight  o'clock  in  the 
morning  and  end  at  four  in  the  afternoon,  allowing  a  re- 
cess at  noon  from  eleven  until  one.  Every  second  day  in 
the  week  he  should  call  his  pupils  together  between  twelve 
and  one  o'clock  to  examine  them  about  what  they  had 
learned  on  the  Sabbath  day  preceding,  and  to  correct  them 
for  any  misdemeanor  or  disorder  that  any  of  them  com- 
mitted on  the  Sabbath.  At  this  examination  any  in- 
habitant of  Dorchester  could  be  present.  He  should 
"  equally  and  impartially  receive  and  instruct  such  as 
should  be  sent  and  committed  to  him  for  that  end 
whether  their  parents  were  poor  or  rich,  not  refusing  any 
who  have  right  and  interest  in  the  School,"  and  should 
instruct  them  as  they  were  able  to  learn.  Every  sixth  day 
of  the  week  at  two  o'clock  in  the  afternoon,  he  should 
catechise  his  scholars  in  the  principles  of  the  Christian  re- 
ligion, either  in  some  catechism  which  the  wardens  provided, 
or,  in  defect  thereof,  in  some  other ;  and  "because  all  man's 
endeavors  without  the  blessing  of  God  must  needs  be  fruit- 
less and  unsuccessful,"  it  was  the  chief  part  of  the  school- 

1  Dorchester  Town  Records^  p.  55. 


176  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [175 

master's  duty  to  "  commend  his  scholars  and  his  labours 
amongst  them  unto  God  by  prayer,  morning  and  even,  tak- 
ing care  that  his  pupils  did  attend  during  the  same."     And, 
because  the  "  rod  of  correction  is  an  ordinance  of  God 
necessary  sometimes  to  be  dispenced  unto  children,"  but  one 
that  may  easily  be  abused  by  too  much  severity  and  rigor 
on  the  one  hand,  or  by  overmuch  indulgence  and  lenity  on 
the  other,   he  was  given   full   power  to   minister  correc- 
tion  to    all    or   any    of   his    scholars    without    respect   of 
persons  according  as  the  nature  and  quality  of  the  offence 
should   require,   and   "  whereto   all   his   scholars  were   re- 
quired duly  to  submit  and  no  parent  or  other  of  the  in- 
habitants could  hinder  or  go  about  to  hinder  the  master 
therein."    However,  any  parent  or  others  who  thought  there 
was  a  just  cause  of  complaint  against  the  master  for  too 
much  severity,  could  expostulate  with  him.     If  they  could 
not  agree,  the  matter  might  then  be  referred  to  the  wardens 
to  decide  between  the  master  and  such  complainants.     If  it 
appeared  to  the  wardens  that  the  parent  had  made  causeless 
complaints  against  the  master,  and  if  he  should  persist  in 
doing  so  the  wardens  had  power  to  request  the  parent  to  re- 
move such  children.     But,  if  the  "  thing  complained  of  was 
true  and  if  the  master  continued  to  exercise  undue  severity," 
notwithstanding  that  they  had  advised  him  otherwise,  in 
such  case,  as  also  in  the  case  of  too  much  lenity,  or  any  other 
great  neglect  of  duty  in  his  place,  the  wardens  were  re- 
quired to  call  the  inhabitants  together,  "  to  consider  whether 
it  would  not  be  meet  to  discharge  the  master  of  his  place 
that  so  some  other  more  desirable  may  be  appointed."    And 
because  it  was  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to  give  particular 
rules  that  should  reach  all  cases  which  occurred,  therefore  it 
was  ordered,  in  general,  that  where  particular  rules  were 
wanting,  there  it  should  be  part  of  the  office  and  duty  of  the 
wardens  to  order  and  dispose  of  all  things  that  concerned  the 


177]  ^^^  SCHOOLS  177 

school  in  such  sort  as  in  their  wisdom  and  discretion  they 
should  judge  most  conducive  "  for  the  glory  of  God,  and 
the  training  up  of  the  children  of  the  town  in  religion, 
learning  and  civility."  These  orders  were  to  be  continued 
till  the  major  part  of  the  town  should  see  cause  to  alter 
them.' 

In  1650  Watertown  made  a  difference  between  the  sub- 
jects to  be  taught  boys  and  those  to  be  taught  girls.  When 
engaging  the  teacher  for  that  year,  the  town  meeting  di- 
rected that  "  if  any  of  the  said  town  have  any  maidens  that 
have  a  desire  to  learn  to  write  that  the  said  Richard  should 
attend  them  for  the  learning  of  them  and  also  to  teach  such 
as  desire  to  cast  accounts." 

In  the  seventeenth  century  the  school  session  was  long. 
Watertown  ordered  its  school  to  be  open  eight  hours  daily, 
from  May  first  to  August  thirty-first,  beginning  at  seven 
A.  M.  and  closing  at  five  P.  M. ;  and  six  hours  daily  from  the 
last  of  August  to  the  last  of  October  and  during  March 
and  April;  while  during  the  four  winter  months  school 
opened  at  ten  A.  M.  and  closed  at  two  P.  M.  In  Salem,  in 
1669,  the  selectmen,  in  obedience  to  an  order  from  the  town, 
passed  an  ordinance  decreeing  that  the  "  school  bell  be  rung 
at  seven  of  the  clock  in  the  morning  and  five  in  the  after- 
noon from  the  first  day  of  March  to  the  first  day  of  No- 
vember, and  at  eight  of  the  clock  in  the  morning  and  four 
in  the  afternoon  from  the  first  day  of  November  to  the  first 
day  of  March  annually  and  the  session  to  begin  and  end 
accordingly."  These  same  hours  were  kept  in  Dorchester, 
but  here  the  length  of  the  noon  hour  was  also  specified, — 
from  eleven  to  one  daily. 

During  the  earliest  years  of  these  towns  the  school  met 
in  the  meeting  house,  as  it  was  then  the  only  public  build- 

"^  Dorchester  Town  Records,  pp.  55,  56. 


178  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [178 

ing  and  was  used  for  a  variety  of  purposes.  Salem  makes 
no  mention  of  a  school  house  until  1655.  Then  two  men 
were  appointed  by  the  selectmen  to  "  get  materials  and 
workmen  to  repair  the  town  house  for  the  school  and 
watch."  The  school  in  Cambridge  may  have  met  in  the 
house  of  Mr.  Henry  Dunster,  on  the  site  of  which  the  school- 
house  was  later  built,  as  early  as  1652;^  but  no  school-house 
is  mentioned  in  her  records  until  1648.  The  first  school- 
house  was  built  by  a  loan  made  by  some  public-spirited  citi- 
zens, amongst  whom  was  Henry  Dunster,  President  of 
Harvard  College.^  The  first  school  house  mentioned  in 
Dorchester  was  begun  in  1638-39,  but  remained  for  years 
in  an  unfinished  condition.  "  It  is  supposed  to  have  stood 
near  the  meeting-house;  and  was  in  the  form  of  an  oblong, 
the  end  set  against  a  rock  that  stands  perpendicular,  which 
said  rock  served  as  a  back  for  to  build  a  fire  against."  ' 
The  first  mention  of  the  school  in  Roxbury  is  in  1645,*  ^^^ 
as  late  as  1666,  the  town  meting  voted  to  meet  "  to  agitate 
about  the  setting  of  the  school."  ®  The  school  house  was 
first  mentioned  in  Watertown  in  1649,  when  nine  pounds 
were  levied  to  build  a  school  house.®  The  following  month 
the  selectmen  appointed  John  Sherman  "  to  procure  the 
school-house  built  .  .  .  and  to  have  it  22  foote  long;  and 
14  ft.  wide  and  9  feet  between  Joynts."  ^  Before  this  time 
the  school  here,  as  elsewhere,  had  been  held  in  the  meeting 
house.® 

1  Paige,  History  of  Cambridge,  p.  370. 

2  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  109. 
8  Dorchester  Book,  p.  24. 

*  See  the  "  Free  School  of  Roxbury,"  by  Dillaway,  for  a  full  discus- 
sion of  the  school  of  Roxbury. 
8  Roxbury  Town  Records,  p.  61. 
«  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  18. 
^  Ibid.,  p.  18.  8  Ibid.,  p.  21. 


179]  ^^^  SCHOOLS  179 

The  schoolmaster  was  one  of  the  few  officials  of  the 
seventeenth  century  town  who  received  a  salary.  Even 
he  did  not  receive  a  stated  salary,  but,  like  the  minister, 
received  annually  what  the  town  thought  it  could  afford. 
The  amount  to  be  paid  him  was  decided  upon  by  the  town 
meeting,  or  occasionally  by  the  selectmen.  It  seldom  ex- 
ceeded thirty  or  forty  pounds  a  year,  and,  as  has  been  shown, 
was  received  partly  from  the  tuition  paid  by  the  scholars 
and  partly  by  a  rate  raised  by  the  town.  Salem,  in  1670, 
paid  its  teacher  twenty  pounds  and  "  half  pay  for  all  schol- 
ars of  the  town  and  whole  pay  from  strangers,"  making  his 
salary  for  that  year  about  sixty  pounds, — an  unusually  large 
sum.  Watertown,  in  a  town  meeting  in  1650,  chose  the 
teacher,  agreeing  to  pay  him  "  for  his  imployment  thirty 
pounds  for  this  year ;"  while  in  1652  the  town  meeting  agreed 
that  "  Mr.  Norcross  was  to  keep  a  school  upon  the  same 
pay  and  the  same  privilege  as  he  had  the  last  year."  In 
1654  Cambridge  voted  "  at  a  meeting  of  the  town  that  the 
Townsmen  shall  levy  about  forty  pounds  for  the  encour- 
agement of  the  grammar  school  master;"  and  in  1691,  that 
twelve  pounds  of  the  teacher's  pay  should  be  "  in  common 
pay  annually."  In  engaging  a  teacher,  however,  the  agree- 
ment was  sometimes  made  for  a  period  of  years.  Thus  Dor- 
chester, in  1655,  made  an  agreement  with  a  certain  Icha- 
bod  Crane  for  "  three  full  years."  In  this  agreement  it 
was  expressly  stated  that  during  the  time  for  which  the 
agreement  was  made  the  school  house  must  be  kept  in  good 
order,  "  comfortable  for  a  man  to  abide  in  both  summer  and 
winter,"  by  providing  fire  in  season  so  that  it  should  not  be 
"  prejudicial  neither  to  master  or  scholar."  In  case  of 
neglect,  the  agreement  should  not  bind  the  master  to  "  en- 
danger his  health."  It  was  also  agreed  that  the  selectmen 
of  Dorchester  should,  during  this  time,  pay  to  the  said 
Ichabod  the  full  sum  of  twenty-five  pounds  every  year,  two- 


l8o  EARLY  NEW  ENGLAND  TOWNS  [i8o 

thirds  in  wheat  or  barley  and  one-third  in  Indian  corn,  on 
or  before  the  first  day  of  March  yearly  at  the  price  current, 
"  which  was  to  be  understood  to  mean  the  price  which  the 
General  Court  should  from  time  to  time  appoint."  ^ 

In  1677  Watertown  agreed  with  Lieutenant  Sherman 
to  "  allow  him  twenty  pounds  in  the  town  rate  that  should 
be  raised  in  that  year,"  and  made  the  agreement  that,  if  he 
wished  to  lay  down  his  employment  at  the  year's  end,  he 
should  give  the  town  three  months'  warning,  the  town  agree- 
ing to  do  the  same  if  it  wished  to  end  the  engagement.^ 

The  towns  did  not  confine  their  care  for  the  education 
of  the  children  to  providing  a  teacher  and  a  school  which 
all  were  allowed  to  attend.  To  assure  themselves  that  the 
children  were  profiting  by  the  educational  means  provided 
for  them,  the  town  officials  visited  the  different  families  of 
the  town  to  examine  the  children ;  called  before  them  for  re- 
proof or  even  punishment  any  parents  who  neglected  to  send 
their  children  to  school;  and  compelled  the  attendance  of 
all  children  upon  school.  Cambridge,  in  1642,  appointed 
a  committee  to  visit  from  house  to  house  in  the  town 
to  see  how  its  orders  concerning  education,  as  well  as  those 
passed  by  the  General  Court,  were  being  obeyed.  The 
town  was  divided  into  eight  districts,  and  to  each  was  as- 
signed a  visitor  to  "  take  care  of  all  the  families  "  in  that 
(part  of  the  town.^  In  1671  it  came  to  the  knowledge  of  the 
selectmen  of  Watertown  that  "  a  child  of  William  Knop  " 
was  being  neglected  in  being  "  learned  in  the  English 
tongue,"  and  they  at  once  appointed  a  certain  man  "to 
warn  William  Knop  to  their  meeting."  *    Again,  in  1674, 

1  Dorchester  Town  Records,  pp.  73-74. 

2  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  129. 
8  Cambridge  Town  Records,  p.  47. 

*  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  107. 


l8i]  THE  SCHOOLS  l8i 

when  the  committee  who  had  be^  visiting  in  the  interest 
of  education  reported  one  John  Fisk  as  being  "  wholly 
negligent  in  educating  his  children  in  reading,"  the  select- 
men "  agreed  that  Joseph  Bemus  should  warn  him  in  to  an 
answer  for  his  neglect  at  the  next  meeting  of  the  select- 
men.'* ^ 


The  similarity  in  the  institutions  and  the  institutional 
development  of  the  early  New  England  towns  is  striking. 
The  ideas  and  ambitions  of  their  settlers,  when  adapted 
to  their  new  environment,  produced  a  type  of  town,  of 
which  Dorchester,  Salem,  Watertown,  Roxbury,  and  Cam- 
bridge are  good  illustrations.  Over  the  institutional  de- 
velopment of  the  towns,  however,  the  General  Court  kept 
a  guiding  hand,  and  to  its  efforts  must  be  ascribed  a  great 
part  of  the  uniformity  which  is  noticeable.  From  the  fact 
that  these  institutions  appear  well  developed  very  early  in 
the  history  of  the  towns,  it  is  clear  that  the  settlers  brought 
with  them  the  germs  from  which  they  sprang.  By  the 
middle  of  the  century,  they  are  found  in  the  form  which 
they  kept,  with  only  slight  modifications,  throughout  the 
colonial  period,  and  in  some  cases,  even  until  to-day.  These 
towns  are  examples  of  the  ease  with  which  a  transplanted 
civilization  adapts  itself  to  new  conditions,  making  the 
changes  necessary  for  its  progress. 

^  Watertown  Town  Records,  p.  122. 


OF  THE     " 

UNIVERSITY 

OF 


VITA 

The  author  of  this  monograph,  Anne  Bush  MacLear, 
was  born  in  Wilmington,  Delaware.  Her  early  education 
was  received  in  the  private  schools  of  that  town.  After 
graduating  in  1891,  she  spent  some  years  in  special  study 
and  then  entered  Teachers  College,  from  which  she  gradu- 
ated in  1 90 1  with  the  degree  of  B.  S.  She  taught  for  one 
year  in  the  Horace  Mann  School,  New  York  City,  as 
"  honor  student,"  and  for  two  years  in  the  Calvert  School, 
Baltimore,  Maryland,  resigning  that  position  to  study  at 
Columbia  University.  There  she  did  work  in  history,  Eng- 
lish, sociology,  and  education,  studying  with  Dr.  H.  L. 
Osgood,  Dr.  Shepherd,  Dr.  Robinson,  Dr.  Dunning,  Dr. 
Giddings,  and  Dr.  Farrand,  and  attending  the  seminars  in 
American  Revolutionary  History  and  Seventeenth  Century 
Colonial  History.  She  took  her  Master's  degree  in  history 
and  English  in  1905,  and  passed  the  examination  for  the 
degree  of  Doctor  of  Philosophy  in  the  spring  of  1906.  At 
present,  she  is  a  teacher  of  history  in  the  Normal  College 
of  the  City  of  New  York. 

183]  183 


RETURN     CIRCULATION  DEPARTMENT 
TO^^      202  Main  Library 

LOAN  PERIOD  1 
HOME  USE 

2                       : 

3 

4 

j 

5                               ( 

b 

^  ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 

RENEV/ALS  AND  RECHARGES  MAY  BE  MADE  4  DAYS  PRJCn  TO  DUE  DATE. 
LOAN  PERJOOG  ARE  1-MONTH,  3-MONTHi..  AND  1-YEAR. 
RENEVMLS.  CALL  (41 J)  t.42-3405 

DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 

liMKt   OCT    3  01S89 

\ 

1 

i 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  BERKELEY 
FORM  NO.  DD6,  60m,  1/83         BERKELEY,  CA  94720 


®$ 


K  39! 


ftc. 


mil 


